Amendment Text:
H.Amdt.357 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)

There is one version of the amendment.

Shown Here:Amendment as Offered (07/23/2013)

This Amendment appears on page H4918 in the following article from the Congressional Record.

[Pages H4877-H4936]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014
General Leave
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on the consideration of H.R.
2397, and that I may include tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 312 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2397.
The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1418
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 2397) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, with
Mrs. Miller in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Visclosky) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Madam Chairman, the subcommittee has produced this bill after months
of bipartisan cooperation, months of hearings, and months of classified
briefings. We present a bill today that includes a base funding of
$512.5 billion--$3.4 billion below the CBO estimate of the President's
request and approximately $28.1 billion above the estimated fiscal year
2013 sequestration level. For Overseas Contingencies Operations, OCO,
the bill includes $85.8 billion, which is $1.5 billion below last
year's level.
We have worked closely with all parties. Mr. Visclosky has been
involved in every step of the way on producing this legislation. Our
committee staff is unrivaled anywhere in this Congress, and they have
done a tremendous job for the subcommittee.
These are some highlights of the bill:
There is $580 million to fully fund the authorized military pay
raise; $536 million to fully fund the anticipated fuel costs; $950
million to fully fund the 2nd Virginia class submarine; $922 million to
restore Facility Sustainment, Modernization and Restoration funding;
and $692 million for military medical research, including $246 million
for cancer research and $125 million for traumatic brain injury
research.
During the next couple of days we are going to consider 100
amendments. So everybody be prepared: it's going to be a long day and a
long night. And Madam Chair, to get us started off on the right track,
I'm going to reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H4878]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.001
[[Page H4879]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.002
[[Page H4880]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.003
[[Page H4881]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.004
[[Page H4882]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.005
[[Page H4883]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.006
[[Page H4884]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.007
[[Page H4885]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY13.008
[[Page H4886]]
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I would like to begin by expressing my appreciation to Chairman
Young, and to congratulate him on the bipartisan and transparent manner
in which he has crafted the fiscal year 2014 Defense bill.
I also want to express my gratitude to Chairman Rogers, Ranking
Member Lowey, and all of the members of the Defense Subcommittee for
their efforts. We would not be here today but for their outstanding
effort.
I would also note that this will be the last Defense appropriations
bill we bring to the floor with the membership of Mr. Bonner from
Alabama. With his leaving this institution, we are losing a very
serious and thoughtful Member who has worked assiduously every day to
leave the world better, and I certainly want to recognize his
individual contribution.
The bill also could not have been written without the dedication,
hard work, and sound judgment of the staff that Mr. Young has already
referenced. I do want to thank Tom McLemore, Sherry Young, Tim Prince,
Jennifer Miller, Walter Hearne, Paul Terry, BG Wright, Brooke Boyer,
Ann Reese, Adrienne Ramsey, Megan Rosenbusch, Maureen Holohan, Paul
Juola, Rebecca Leggieri, Kent Clark, Michael Rigney, and Joe DeVooght.
The bill at hand is fundamentally aimed at restoring readiness and
training for the services to areas that have suffered greatly in the
budgetary upset of the current year.
While Chairman Young has noted that the bill's $212 billion in
funding is approximately $28 billion more than the fiscal year 2013
post-sequestration level, it does contain a number of significant
reductions. The bill cuts $617.8 million from the Joint Strike Fighter
program to address unjustified cost growth and unjustified concurrency
estimates for the program. It cuts another $112 million due to an
overstatement of Army travel requirements. The bill rescinds $443
million for C-27-J aircraft.
The bill and report contain a significant amount of language and
robust funding for initiatives to respond to sexual assault in the
armed services. Sexual assault in any circumstance is unacceptable and
maddening. The fact that it is prevalent within the military is even
more so because of the standard to which our men and women in uniform
hold themselves. These are individuals who are committed to give their
``last full measure of devotion'' to our Nation, who, in order to be
effective, need to unconditionally trust each other. Sexual assault
undermines all of this.
Though I strongly support the efforts contained in this bill, they
are aimed mainly at offender accountability and caring for victims.
Even though the comprehensive solution to this issue lies outside the
services, it is imperative that the proper attitudes and training start
during the recruitment process for the officers and enlisted and
continue throughout each servicemembers' career.
I would also note that the bill includes $20 million above the
request for suicide prevention and outreach, consistent with the
funding level of the past 2 years. Suicides are another disheartening
problem within the services, especially given the emphasis that the
Department and Congress have placed on the issue over the past few
years. But money is not the only solution. We need to spend the
appropriated dollars as wisely and as effectively as possible.
I was taken aback in a hearing earlier this year to learn that the
Navy has a collection of 123 programs aimed at addressing suicide and
resiliency. While I am sure that each one of these programs is well-
intentioned, the sheer number spreads resources too thin and creates
confusion. To their credit, the Navy is in the process of implementing
task force recommendations to dedicate more resources to the programs
that truly work.
Additionally, I would like to express my support for a solution that
benefits all future users of the Integrated Electronic Health Record
program. I am proud of the efforts of our subcommittee and of the
Military Construction-Veterans Affairs Subcommittee to effectuate this
long-awaited improvement to medical care for our still-serving military
members and our veterans. Additionally, the cooperation between our
subcommittees and with our corresponding authorization committees
demonstrates the importance Congress places on the issue.
I am pleased that the bill report contains provisions that enhance
oversight at the Department. The Office of the Inspector General is
funded at $347 million, which is nearly $35 million above the
administration's request. This office plays a vital role in moving the
Department towards auditable financial statements, which are long
overdue and which I attach great importance to.
Also, while the committee increased funding relative to the budget
request for environmental cleanup at Formerly Used Defense Sites, this
increase is accompanied by additional reporting requirements. In the
same vein as my prior comments, the money in this program must be spent
more effectively going forward to ensure that we complete cleanup
projects, not just continue them.
Regarding missile defense, the bill increases advance procurement
funding for additional Ground-Based Interceptors. This funding is
accompanied by a requirement to document the adequacy of the testing
plan for the Ground-Based Interceptors.
In light of the program's recent test failure, I continue to be very
concerned about the concurrency of this program. I believe it is
essential to maintain rigorous standards to ensure that the weapons we
pursue are fully developed before we begin fielding them, and once
fielded, that these weapons effectively perform their missions.
Further, should the review to determine the cause of the latest test
failure reveal significant problems, and if we understand that this
program needs to be changed, we should reevaluate our position in
conference.
While I support the bill, there are a few provisions that I have
concerns with, in particular, the three general provisions regarding
detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
I believe that the continued operation of Guantanamo Bay reduces our
Nation's credibility and weakens our national security by providing
terrorist organizations with recruitment material. I do regret that
this bill and other relevant appropriations bills continue to thwart
any attempts to close Guantanamo by prohibiting viable alternatives.
Further, I am concerned that the bill essentially prohibits a pay
raise for civilian employees at the Department of Defense. We rely on
the Department of Defense civilians working side by side with our
military personnel to provide medical care for our troops, to perform
vital logistics, maintenance and acquisition services, and to provide
many other essential services within the Department. Even a modest
raise that maintains pay equity between civilian and military personnel
sends a critical message of support to these employees.
Looking ahead, I am concerned that if the shadows of the future
remain unaltered, we will experience serious problems ensuring the
continued defense of our Nation.
{time} 1430
As Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessments has noted:
Rather than getting larger and more expensive over the past
decade, the military just grew more expensive.
This reality makes our future choices even more difficult, and it is
imperative that Congress join with the Department in working through
these decisions at arm's length and also as a partner.
The Department of Defense did recommend some very difficult
reductions in the budget submitted to us earlier this year, as they
have done in previous years. We, as legislators, can no longer afford
to reflexively reject those recommendations because they affect a
specific company, a specific region of the country, or are simply not
the most politic of choices to be made.
Our military is at a familiar crossroad, one they have been at before
as the end of combat operations nears. The additions and subtractions
to Defense funding made today must be carried out with an eye to the
future, with a sense of the strategic impact on America's future
ability to muster a force of successfully defending and protecting our
country.
[[Page H4887]]
In closing, I again want to reiterate my appreciation to Chairman
Young for his cooperation and assistance in addressing the interests we
have expressed. He and his staff have ensured that the subcommittee
continues its long tradition of operating collaboratively and
effectively and transparently. I am pleased that we are finally
considering this bill on the floor and look forward to the debate.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, first, I would like to thank
Mr. Visclosky for his much more detailed description of this
legislation.
I would now yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the full Committee on
Appropriations, who has strongly committed to making sure that we pass
all of our appropriations bills, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.
Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding this
time.
Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this, the DOD appropriations
bill.
This bill provides more than $512 billion in base funding for our
national security and military efforts, and $85.8 billion in Overseas
Contingency Operations war funding. This is a base funding decrease of
$5.1 billion below fiscal 2013, but is about $28.1 billion above the
current level caused by automatic sequestration spending cuts.
This total reflects an appropriate, thorough analysis of what is
needed to keep this country safe. Freedom isn't free. Our liberties,
our rights, our property are preserved by our national defense, but at
a cost.
Sufficient funding for the Pentagon and our military is of the utmost
importance to the continued prosperity of the United States of America.
It is, and should be, our top priority.
We have already seen the distressing toll that the heavy-handed,
indiscriminate cuts of sequestration have taken on our military--from
grounded planes, to reduced training time, to postponed maintenance--
all of which contribute to the loss of readiness of our troops.
As we saw all this month as Department of Defense civilian furloughs
began, our economy is also taking a significant hit.
The funding level in this bill strikes a balance between fiscal
responsibility and sufficient support for our military. Within this
total, we prioritize funding to advance our missions abroad, to prepare
and equip our troops, and to ensure the readiness and effectiveness of
our military. This includes adequate funding to purchase the equipment,
weapons, and vehicles needed to keep our military protected, at the
ready, and able to conduct successful operations.
The bill also provides funding for ongoing operations and maintenance
of military facilities, equipment, and bases--fundamental to the
successful missions of our Armed Forces. Essential funding is proposed
to develop new defense technologies, to advance the success of current
military operations, and to plan for whatever new threats may arise in
the future.
A well-equipped military is not as effective without strong and well-
prepared troops. This funding supports readiness programs that prepare
our troops for both combat and peacetime missions, giving them flight
time and battle training.
In addition, the bill funds the authorized 1.8 percent pay raise for
the military--above the 1 percent the President requested. To keep our
troops healthy before and after battle, the Defense Health Program
receives an increase above last year's level, funding medical facility
upgrades, traumatic brain injury and psychological health research, and
suicide prevention outreach.
The bill also addresses what has been a black mark on our military,
Madam Chairman--the problem with sexual assault. The legislation fully
funds Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs and adds $25
million in funding for sexual assault victim assistance to preserve
trust in our military and ensure that members of our Armed Forces are
not sacrificing more than they already have to serve this Nation.
But a balanced budget--one that does not put us into massive debt to
other governments or threaten our economic stability--is also paramount
to our national security. Even these critical national security
programs cannot spend precious tax dollars unchecked.
The bill has implemented commonsense reductions wherever possible,
including rescinding unused, prior-year funding, nixing a proposed
civilian pay raise, and saving $1 billion in anticipated excess
funding. We have also prohibited funding to modify facilities in the
U.S. to house Guantanamo detainees or to allow their transfer into the
U.S. or its territories.
When all is said and done, this bill cuts more than $5 billion below
last year's enacted level; but I must emphasize that these reductions
will in no way harm or negatively affect our national defense or the
troops that fight to protect this great country.
Madam Chairman, some will complain that the bill breaks the cap
placed on Defense spending under the sequester level for fiscal year
2014 put into place by the Budget Control Act. To this I say, of course
it does.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. The massive, irresponsible, dangerous
reductions to Defense spending under the sequestration cap is
completely beyond the pale.
For example, if nothing is done to cancel the next round of
sequestration cuts that are scheduled to take effect when this Congress
adjourns, this bill would be cut to a total of $468 billion.
Before I close, Madam Chairman, I would like to take this time to
thank the venerable chairman of the subcommittee, Bill Young. He is a
national asset. He has shown again the skill that he has in putting
together a great bill.
To Mr. Visclosky, thank you for being a great partner to our chairman
throughout this process.
To the staff and the entire subcommittee members, without your hard
work we would not have this bill on the floor. I salute you and endorse
this bill wholeheartedly.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I would yield such time as she may
consume to the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Young, Ranking Member
Visclosky, and Chairman Rogers for working across the aisle on the bill
before us today in keeping with the Defense Subcommittee's long
bipartisan tradition. I also want to recognize and thank the Defense
Subcommittee staff for working tirelessly on the nuts and bolts of this
bill.
Sadly, however, the appropriations process has become a quandary that
could easily have been avoided with good old-fashioned compromise.
Instead, we have disparate House and Senate allocations. House bills
follow the Ryan budget, which endorses sequestration and is
unrealistic, unworkable, and economically misguided, while the Senate
and White House budgets are based on the higher level agreed upon in
the Budget Control Act. With only 18 days of session left in the House
before the end of the fiscal year, we are racing toward a government
shutdown that is irresponsible.
Assuming the sequester is turned off, this is a good bill. It
includes additional funding and tougher penalties to address the
epidemic of sexual assault plaguing our military, an increase for
Active Duty pay by 1.8 percent, enhancements to embassy security by
increasing the presence of Marine Corps security guards, substantial
investments in health services and suicide prevention, maintenance of
all the National Guard weapons of mass destruction/civil support teams,
and continued support for the Israeli Cooperative Program.
However, the bill also contains serious shortcomings. On July 8, I
was at Camp Smith in my district in New York where 48 of the more than
600,000 Defense civilian employees nationwide are being furloughed.
Each will lose $2,706, a 20 percent reduction to their fourth-quarter
earnings, on top of 3 years without a pay increase. Yet this bill does
nothing to fix the pay freeze or furloughs resulting from the
sequester.
In fact, the majority simply ignores sequestration when it suits
their purpose, including in the spending allocations for MilCon-VA,
Homeland Security, and Defense bills. While the Republicans are
steadfast in sticking to the post-sequester overall discretionary
allocation they included in the
[[Page H4888]]
Ryan budget, they are comfortable breaking the Budget Control Act's cap
on Defense spending by $47.7 billion.
Of course, they may not tell you that, unless we end the sequester,
on January 15 those funds will be lost, creating a gaping hole in the
Defense budget. They don't have the courage of their convictions to
admit that breaking the Defense cap further shortchanges vital domestic
priorities like medical research, Head Start, teachers for military
families, energy efficiency, disaster preparedness, and other vital
investments, all of which create jobs.
We have already achieved $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction since
2011, including $1.5 trillion in discretionary cuts. It is time for
Congress to buckle down to reach a bipartisan agreement to replace
sequestration with a balanced approach that protects critical services
and investments.
As I did for MilCon-VA and Homeland Security, I support the overall
funding level in Defense because it was written as though Congress will
turn off sequestration, as we should.
But on the remaining bills, as with the Energy and Water bill, I will
not support slashing investments in our families and workforce. If we
are to remain a global leader, we need a strong national defense and a
strong economy.
I thank you again to the chairman and the ranking member, who have
worked so hard in a bipartisan way, maintaining the tradition of this
committee. As we move forward, I do hope that we can go to conference
and work together with the Senate to come up with a bill that can
really pass and sequestration be eliminated.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 4
minutes to an important member of our subcommittee, the very
distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for yielding me the time.
Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of our Defense appropriations
bill. Under Chairman Young's leadership and collaboration and strong
support from Mr. Visclosky, our committee held a lengthy series of
hearings examining varied topics: our operations in Afghanistan, the
so-called pivot to the Asia-Pacific, the Army and Air Force's need for
modernization, Navy shipbuilding, marine end strength, military health
care, acquisition reform, sexual assaults, among other important
issues, and, of course, the impact of the sequester, the negative
impact.
{time} 1445
Most of our hearings related to reducing risk in the defense budget
and the new strategic guidance from the Department of Defense--
protecting our gains as well as preparing for current and future
threats--China's growing military capability; continued uncertainty in
North Korea and that peninsula; the destabilizing civil war in Syria;
Iran's race to develop a nuclear weapons capability and their threat to
close the Straits of Hormuz, among others.
Our goal throughout this bill is to provide the resources to support
our warfighters now and in the future, whenever the next crisis arises.
Madam Chairman, our subcommittee, like other Appropriations
subcommittees, clearly recognizes the Nation's debt and deficit and
found areas and programs where reductions are possible without
adversely impacting our Armed Forces and our modernization efforts.
Frankly, it is important that we find savings without harming readiness
or increasing the risks incurred by our warfighters.
Under Chairman Young's leadership, our committee has had a close
examination of military needs and very necessary oversight, so our
legislation before us includes funding for critical national security
and intelligence needs based on a very strong hearing process. In
addition, the bill provides essential funding for health and quality of
life programs for all of our men and women in uniform--all volunteers--
and their families. They deserve nothing less.
I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their
leadership, and I strongly support the bill.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume, and I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for
the purpose of entering into a colloquy.
Mr. FARR. Madam Chairman, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the
chairman and the gentleman from Indiana on an issue regarding
timeliness, accuracy, and the review of security clearance processing.
As the chairman is aware, security clearances are necessary to
protect our national security and are required for thousands of jobs.
However, the length of time it takes to conduct the investigations, the
quality of the investigations, and the continuous review of approved
security clearances are three areas that could be improved. I believe
that there is a solution to all three of these concerns, and it
involves the leveraging of automated investigation tools already in
existence.
The Defense Department has within its subordinate activities the
Defense Personnel Security Research Center, known as PERSEREC. It has
researched and developed a number of automated toolsets that can reduce
the time it takes to adjudicate investigations, to grade the quality of
the investigations, to measure human error, and to provide a way to
monitor and reaffirm granted clearances based on an analysis of human
behavior.
These computer programs could dramatically increase the quality of
the investigations while at the same time saving money and shortening
the time it takes to both approve and reinvestigate security
clearances. These tools are already available today, but they have not
been leveraged. Instead, the majority of security clearances is being
investigated by an antiquated analog adjudication process that just
doesn't reflect the best research and development readily available to
the Department of Defense by PERSEREC.
I greatly appreciate that the chairman and ranking member of the
Defense Subcommittee have included report language encouraging the
Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management to use
these automated tools and systems readily available for the security
clearance process.
Would my colleagues agree that the security clearance process should
incorporate proven tools that ensure increased efficiency and quality?
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I would note to the gentleman from California that,
with the recent concerns regarding security clearance processes for the
Department of Defense and intelligence communities, I appreciate his
bringing to our attention that the Department can increase the
timeliness and quality of investigations and reinvestigations by using
the Defense Personnel Security Research Center tools.
Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman for his response.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman from Indiana yield?
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I am aware of the gentleman from
California's deep interest, and I appreciate his proposed solution in
finding ways to address this issue.
Like my good friend from Indiana, I agree that we should work with
our friend Mr. Farr to ensure that the Department of Defense and the
Director of National Intelligence leverage the security clearance
research at PERSEREC in order to improve the precision and speed of
investigations, and that is exactly why we included it in our report.
Mr. FARR. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. FARR. I thank both of you for your friendship, your leadership,
and your cooperation.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner) for the purpose of engaging in a
colloquy.
Mr. TURNER. I appreciate the gentleman's commitment to enter into a
colloquy.
Madam Chair, I rise to speak about the Abrams tank. The
Appropriations Committee has wisely included funding in the last 2
years for continuing to upgrade the Abrams tank. That action kept the
Abrams production line warm and preserved a critical industrial
capability. However, there is no funding, as I understand it, in the FY
2014 Defense appropriations bill for additional tank upgrades.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
[[Page H4889]]
Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the gentleman is correct. The
administration's budget request for fiscal year 2014 includes no funds
for the production of Abrams tanks, and the committee bill provides
none. The Army is only now addressing the funds added for fiscal year
'13, and production of the M1A2s will actually continue until December
of 2014.
Mr. TURNER. Madam Chair, in reclaiming my time, I understand that,
earlier in the year, both the administration and others believed that
foreign military sales alone may be sufficient to keep this production
line running. Those sales have not yet materialized, and I remain
concerned that we are risking a critical national asset based solely on
the anticipation of foreign sales.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Foreign military sales have helped sustain a
warm tank production line. Despite the delays and uncertainties in the
FMS process, it is very likely that FMS sales will continue to play an
important part in sustaining the tank line.
Mr. TURNER. In reclaiming my time, I understand that the committee
intends to wait until the Army announces its force structure changes
and then will assess the need for additional upgraded tanks. While I
respect that position, I think that, with whatever changes the Army
makes, we will still need to keep that smaller force as effective as
possible. The way to ensure that is to provide all remaining Armored
Brigade Combat Teams with M1A2 SEP tanks.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the points raised
by my colleague.
We will continue to monitor the overall requirement for tanks in both
the active Army and the Army National Guard. We intend to relook at the
issue of additional Abrams upgrades as we move forward in the
appropriations process. We will have the benefit of more complete
information on foreign military sales and of the Army's force structure
analysis. Protecting the industrial base will remain a critical issue.
Mr. TURNER. In reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman
for his continued interest and for his support in this matter.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I know my friend from Florida
shares my concerns regarding our Nation's nuclear deterrents and
specifically in preserving the sea-based leg of the Nuclear Triad in
the Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missiles, which are
carried on the Ohio-class submarine.
The current fleet of ballistic missile submarines is planned for
service through the year 2042, and the D5 missile they carry is
expected to remain viable much longer and will see service on the
replacement platform. I hope the chairman agrees.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I do agree and the gentleman is correct.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. In reclaiming my time, the original design life
of the D5 missile rocket motors was 25 years. Some of the currently
deployed motors are reaching that age, and the missiles require a life
extension to maintain viability.
Does the chairman agree that the life extension program for the D5
missile is critical to ensure the missile will remain the highest level
of reliability for as long as our Nation requires it?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I will tell the gentleman that I do agree. I
would add that the ending of the Space Shuttle Program has also
exacerbated the hardships of the industrial base, and I agree that the
Navy's D5 program is now the cornerstone of the Nation's solid rocket
motor production.
I feel that it is essential that the Navy sustain a steady production
rate of 12 rocket motors per year as the minimum level to ensure that
replacement motors are available to replace aged-out motors as well as
to keep this unique and highly skilled engineering and workforce viable
into the future. The industrial base has done a Herculean effort in
downsizing and in becoming more efficient in the face of the declining
workload as enhanced by the attractive pricing they provided the Navy
on a recent motor contract.
I will work to ensure that the Navy has sufficient funding to
maintain at least the minimum production required to sustain this
critical industrial base.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. In reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman and
compliment him on his great work on this issue.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. As we have no further speakers, Madam Chair, I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I am happy to yield back the
balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule, and the bill shall be considered read through
page 157, line 2.
The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2397
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2014, for military functions
administered by the Department of Defense and for other
purposes, namely:
TITLE I
MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military Personnel, Army
For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Army on active
duty, (except members of reserve components provided for
elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; for members of the
Reserve Officers' Training Corps; and for payments pursuant
to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C.
402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund, $40,908,919,000.
Military Personnel, Navy
For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Navy on active
duty (except members of the Reserve provided for elsewhere),
midshipmen, and aviation cadets; for members of the Reserve
Officers' Training Corps; and for payments pursuant to
section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402
note), and to the Department of Defense Military Retirement
Fund, $27,671,555,000.
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Marine Corps on
active duty (except members of the Reserve provided for
elsewhere); and for payments pursuant to section 156 of
Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402 note), and to
the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund,
$12,826,857,000.
Military Personnel, Air Force
For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Air Force on
active duty (except members of reserve components provided
for elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; for members of
the Reserve Officers' Training Corps; and for payments
pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42
U.S.C. 402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund, $28,382,963,000.
Reserve Personnel, Army
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10302, and 3038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with
[[Page H4890]]
performing duty specified in section 12310(a) of title 10,
United States Code, or while undergoing reserve training, or
while performing drills or equivalent duty or other duty, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund, $4,483,343,000.
Reserve Personnel, Navy
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Navy
Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund, $1,875,536,000.
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Marine
Corps Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
for members of the Marine Corps platoon leaders class, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund, $665,499,000.
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air Force
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10305, and 8038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent
duty or other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131
of title 10, United States Code; and for payments to the
Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund,
$1,745,579,000.
National Guard Personnel, Army
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
National Guard while on duty under section 10211, 10302, or
12402 of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States
Code, or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of
title 10 or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund, $7,958,568,000.
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air
National Guard on duty under section 10211, 10305, or 12402
of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States Code,
or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of title 10
or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund, $3,130,361,000.
TITLE II
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and Maintenance, Army
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Army, as authorized by law;
and not to exceed $12,478,000 can be used for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Army, and payments may be
made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes, $35,183,796,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Navy and the Marine Corps,
as authorized by law; and not to exceed $15,055,000 can be
used for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be
expended on the approval or authority of the Secretary of the
Navy, and payments may be made on his certificate of
necessity for confidential military purposes,
$40,127,402,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Marine Corps, as authorized
by law, $6,298,757,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Air Force, as authorized by
law; and not to exceed $7,699,000 can be used for emergencies
and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Air Force, and payments may
be made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes, $37,438,701,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
(including transfer of funds)
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of activities and agencies of the
Department of Defense (other than the military departments),
as authorized by law, $32,301,685,000: Provided, That not
more than $25,000,000 may be used for the Combatant Commander
Initiative Fund authorized under section 166a of title 10,
United States Code: Provided further, That not to exceed
$36,000,000 can be used for emergencies and extraordinary
expenses, to be expended on the approval or authority of the
Secretary of Defense, and payments may be made on his
certificate of necessity for confidential military purposes:
Provided further, That of the funds provided under this
heading, not less than $36,262,000 shall be made available
for the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative
Agreement Program, of which not less than $3,600,000 shall be
available for centers defined in 10 U.S.C. 2411(1)(D):
Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be used to plan or
implement the consolidation of a budget or appropriations
liaison office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the
office of the Secretary of a military department, or the
service headquarters of one of the Armed Forces into a
legislative affairs or legislative liaison office: Provided
further, That $8,721,000, to remain available until expended,
is available only for expenses relating to certain classified
activities, and may be transferred as necessary by the
Secretary of Defense to operation and maintenance
appropriations or research, development, test and evaluation
appropriations, to be merged with and to be available for the
same time period as the appropriations to which transferred:
Provided further, That any ceiling on the investment item
unit cost of items that may be purchased with operation and
maintenance funds shall not apply to the funds described in
the preceding proviso: Provided further, That the transfer
authority provided under this heading is in addition to any
other transfer authority provided elsewhere in this Act.
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Army Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications,
$3,199,151,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Navy Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications,
$1,200,283,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Marine Corps Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications, $266,561,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Air Force Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications, $3,149,046,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the
Army National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment
and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance,
operation, and repairs to structures and facilities; hire of
passenger motor vehicles; personnel services in the National
Guard Bureau; travel expenses (other than mileage), as
authorized by law for Army personnel on active duty, for Army
National Guard division, regimental, and battalion commanders
while inspecting units in compliance with National Guard
Bureau regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau; supplying and equipping the Army
National Guard as authorized by law; and expenses of repair,
modification, maintenance, and issue of supplies and
equipment (including aircraft), $7,102,113,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the
Air National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment
and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance,
operation, and repairs to structures and facilities;
transportation of
[[Page H4891]]
things, hire of passenger motor vehicles; supplying and
equipping the Air National Guard, as authorized by law;
expenses for repair, modification, maintenance, and issue of
supplies and equipment, including those furnished from stocks
under the control of agencies of the Department of Defense;
travel expenses (other than mileage) on the same basis as
authorized by law for Air National Guard personnel on active
Federal duty, for Air National Guard commanders while
inspecting units in compliance with National Guard Bureau
regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau, $6,675,999,000.
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
For salaries and expenses necessary for the United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, $13,606,000, of which
not to exceed $5,000 may be used for official representation
purposes.
Environmental Restoration, Army
(including transfer of funds)
For the Department of the Army, $298,815,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of the Army, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Army,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under
this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.
Environmental Restoration, Navy
(including transfer of funds)
For the Department of the Navy, $316,103,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Navy shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of the Navy, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Navy,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under
this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.
Environmental Restoration, Air Force
(including transfer of funds)
For the Department of the Air Force, $439,820,000, to
remain available until transferred: Provided, That the
Secretary of the Air Force shall, upon determining that such
funds are required for environmental restoration, reduction
and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings
and debris of the Department of the Air Force, or for similar
purposes, transfer the funds made available by this
appropriation to other appropriations made available to the
Department of the Air Force, to be merged with and to be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period
as the appropriations to which transferred: Provided further,
That upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation: Provided further, That the
transfer authority provided under this heading is in addition
to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere in this
Act.
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide
(including transfer of funds)
For the Department of Defense, $10,757,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
Defense shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of Defense, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of Defense,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under
this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites
(including transfer of funds)
For the Department of the Army, $262,443,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at
sites formerly used by the Department of Defense, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Army,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under
this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
For expenses relating to the Overseas Humanitarian,
Disaster, and Civic Aid programs of the Department of Defense
(consisting of the programs provided under sections 401, 402,
404, 407, 2557, and 2561 of title 10, United States Code),
$109,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015.
Cooperative Threat Reduction Account
For assistance to the republics of the former Soviet Union
and, with appropriate authorization by the Department of
Defense and Department of State, to countries outside of the
former Soviet Union, including assistance provided by
contract or by grants, for facilitating the elimination and
the safe and secure transportation and storage of nuclear,
chemical and other weapons; for establishing programs to
prevent the proliferation of weapons, weapons components, and
weapon-related technology and expertise; for programs
relating to the training and support of defense and military
personnel for demilitarization and protection of weapons,
weapons components and weapons technology and expertise, and
for defense and military contacts, $528,455,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2016.
department of defense acquisition workforce development fund
For the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce
Development Fund, $51,031,000.
TITLE III
PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$5,236,653,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Missile Procurement, Army
For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$1,628,083,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of weapons and tracked combat vehicles, equipment, including
ordnance, spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including the land necessary therefor, for
the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein,
may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway; and other expenses necessary for the
foregoing purposes, $1,545,560,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2016.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement
[[Page H4892]]
and installation of equipment, appliances, and machine tools
in public and private plants; reserve plant and Government
and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other expenses
necessary for the foregoing purposes, $1,465,937,000, to
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2016.
Other Procurement, Army
For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of vehicles, including tactical, support, and non-tracked
combat vehicles; the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for
replacement only; communications and electronic equipment;
other support equipment; spare parts, ordnance, and
accessories therefor; specialized equipment and training
devices; expansion of public and private plants, including
the land necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and
such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$6,467,751,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized equipment;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may
be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway, $17,092,784,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2016.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, torpedoes, other weapons, and
related support equipment including spare parts, and
accessories therefor; expansion of public and private plants,
including the land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and
procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and
machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and
Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway,
$3,017,646,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$544,116,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
For expenses necessary for the construction, acquisition,
or conversion of vessels as authorized by law, including
armor and armament thereof, plant equipment, appliances, and
machine tools and installation thereof in public and private
plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned
equipment layaway; procurement of critical, long lead time
components and designs for vessels to be constructed or
converted in the future; and expansion of public and private
plants, including land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title, as follows:
Carrier Replacement Program (AP), $944,866,000;
Virginia Class Submarine, $3,880,704,000;
Virginia Class Submarine (AP), $2,354,612,000;
CVN Refuelings, $1,609,324,000;
CVN Refuelings (AP), $245,793,000;
DDG-1000 Program, $231,694,000;
DDG-51 Destroyer, $1,615,564,000;
DDG-51 Destroyer (AP), $388,551,000;
Littoral Combat Ship, $1,793,014,000;
Afloat Forward Staging Base (AP), $562,000,000;
Joint High Speed Vessel, $10,332,000;
Moored Training Ship, $207,300,000;
LCAC Service Life Extension Program, $80,987,000;
For Outfitting, post delivery, conversions, and first
destination transportation, $450,163,000; and
For Completion of Prior Year Shipbuilding Programs,
$625,800,000.
In all: $15,000,704,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2018: Provided, That additional
obligations may be incurred after September 30, 2018, for
engineering services, tests, evaluations, and other such
budgeted work that must be performed in the final stage of
ship construction: Provided further, That none of the funds
provided under this heading for the construction or
conversion of any naval vessel to be constructed in shipyards
in the United States shall be expended in foreign facilities
for the construction of major components of such vessel:
Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this
heading shall be used for the construction of any naval
vessel in foreign shipyards.
Other Procurement, Navy
For procurement, production, and modernization of support
equipment and materials not otherwise provided for, Navy
ordnance (except ordnance for new aircraft, new ships, and
ships authorized for conversion); the purchase of passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; expansion of public and
private plants, including the land necessary therefor, and
such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway,
$6,824,824,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Procurement, Marine Corps
For expenses necessary for the procurement, manufacture,
and modification of missiles, armament, military equipment,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; plant equipment,
appliances, and machine tools, and installation thereof in
public and private plants; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway; vehicles for the Marine
Corps, including the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for
replacement only; and expansion of public and private plants,
including land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title,
$1,271,311,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
For construction, procurement, and modification of aircraft
and equipment, including armor and armament, specialized
ground handling equipment, and training devices, spare parts,
and accessories therefor; specialized equipment; expansion of
public and private plants, Government-owned equipment and
installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures,
and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing
purposes including rents and transportation of things,
$10,860,606,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
For construction, procurement, and modification of
missiles, spacecraft, rockets, and related equipment,
including spare parts and accessories therefor, ground
handling equipment, and training devices; expansion of public
and private plants, Government-owned equipment and
installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures,
and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing
purposes including rents and transportation of things,
$5,267,119,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities, authorized
by section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$743,442,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2016.
Other Procurement, Air Force
For procurement and modification of equipment (including
ground guidance and electronic control equipment, and ground
electronic and communication equipment), and supplies,
materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise provided
for; the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for replacement
only; lease of passenger motor vehicles; and expansion of
public and private plants, Government-owned equipment and
installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures,
and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon, prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway, $16,791,497,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2016.
Procurement, Defense-wide
For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments) necessary
for procurement, production, and modification of equipment,
supplies, materials, and spare parts
[[Page H4893]]
therefor, not otherwise provided for; the purchase of
passenger motor vehicles for replacement only; expansion of
public and private plants, equipment, and installation
thereof in such plants, erection of structures, and
acquisition of land for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway, $4,522,990,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2016.
Defense Production Act Purchases
For activities by the Department of Defense pursuant to
sections 108, 301, 302, and 303 of the Defense Production Act
of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2078, 2091, 2092, and 2093),
$75,135,000, to remain available until expended.
TITLE IV
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment, $7,961,486,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2015.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment, $15,368,352,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2015: Provided,
That funds appropriated in this paragraph which are available
for the V-22 may be used to meet unique operational
requirements of the Special Operations Forces: Provided
further, That funds appropriated in this paragraph shall be
available for the Cobra Judy program.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment, $24,947,354,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2015.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide
(including transfer of funds)
For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments), necessary
for basic and applied scientific research, development, test
and evaluation; advanced research projects as may be
designated and determined by the Secretary of Defense,
pursuant to law; maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and
operation of facilities and equipment, $17,885,538,000, to
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2015:
Provided, That of the funds made available in this paragraph,
$250,000,000 for the Defense Rapid Innovation Program shall
only be available for expenses, not otherwise provided for,
to include program management and oversight, to conduct
research, development, test and evaluation to include proof
of concept demonstration; engineering, testing, and
validation; and transition to full-scale production:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer
funds provided herein for the Defense Rapid Innovation
Program to appropriations for research, development, test and
evaluation to accomplish the purpose provided herein:
Provided further, That this transfer authority is in addition
to any other transfer authority available to the Department
of Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall, not fewer than 30 days prior to making transfers from
this appropriation, notify the congressional defense
committees in writing of the details of any such transfer.
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
independent activities of the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation, in the direction and supervision of operational
test and evaluation, including initial operational test and
evaluation which is conducted prior to, and in support of,
production decisions; joint operational testing and
evaluation; and administrative expenses in connection
therewith, $246,800,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2015.
TITLE V
REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS
Defense Working Capital Funds
For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $1,545,827,000.
National Defense Sealift Fund
For National Defense Sealift Fund programs, projects, and
activities, and for expenses of the National Defense Reserve
Fleet, as established by section 11 of the Merchant Ship
Sales Act of 1946 (50 U.S.C. App. 1744), and for the
necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag
merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the
United States, $595,700,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That none of the funds provided in this
paragraph shall be used to award a new contract that provides
for the acquisition of any of the following major components
unless such components are manufactured in the United States:
auxiliary equipment, including pumps, for all shipboard
services; propulsion system components (engines, reduction
gears, and propellers); shipboard cranes; and spreaders for
shipboard cranes: Provided further, That the exercise of an
option in a contract awarded through the obligation of
previously appropriated funds shall not be considered to be
the award of a new contract: Provided further, That the
Secretary of the military department responsible for such
procurement may waive the restrictions in the first proviso
on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate that adequate domestic supplies are not
available to meet Department of Defense requirements on a
timely basis and that such an acquisition must be made in
order to acquire capability for national security purposes.
TITLE VI
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Defense Health Program
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, for medical and
health care programs of the Department of Defense as
authorized by law, $33,573,582,000; of which $31,566,688,000
shall be for operation and maintenance, of which not to
exceed one percent shall remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2015 and of which up to $15,969,816,000
may be available for contracts entered into under the TRICARE
program; of which $671,181,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2016, shall be for
procurement; and of which $1,335,713,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2015, shall be for
research, development, test and evaluation: Provided, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the amount
made available under this heading for research, development,
test and evaluation, not less than $8,000,000 shall be
available for HIV prevention educational activities
undertaken in connection with United States military
training, exercises, and humanitarian assistance activities
conducted primarily in African nations: Provided further,
That of the funds made available under this Act for research,
development, test and evaluation, procurement, or operation
and maintenance for the Defense Health Agency, not more than
25 percent may be used until the date on which the program
plan for the oversight and execution of the integrated
electronic health record program required by subtitle C of
title VII of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014 is submitted to Congress.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
destruction of the United States stockpile of lethal chemical
agents and munitions in accordance with the provisions of
section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act,
1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the destruction of other
chemical warfare materials that are not in the chemical
weapon stockpile, $1,057,123,000, of which $451,572,000 shall
be for operation and maintenance, of which no less than
$51,217,000 shall be for the Chemical Stockpile Emergency
Preparedness Program, consisting of $21,489,000 for
activities on military installations and $29,728,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2015, to assist State
and local governments; $1,368,000 shall be for procurement,
to remain available until September 30, 2016, of which
$1,368,000 shall be for the Chemical Stockpile Emergency
Preparedness Program to assist State and local governments;
and $604,183,000, to remain available until September 30,
2015, shall be for research, development, test and
evaluation, of which $584,238,000 shall only be for the
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
(including transfer of funds)
For drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the
Department of Defense, for transfer to appropriations
available to the Department of Defense for military personnel
of the reserve components serving under the provisions of
title 10 and title 32, United States Code; for operation and
maintenance; for procurement; and for research, development,
test and evaluation, $1,007,762,000: Provided, That the funds
appropriated under this heading shall be available for
obligation for the same time period and for the same purpose
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation: Provided further, That the
transfer authority provided under this heading is in addition
to any other transfer authority contained elsewhere in this
Act.
Office of the Inspector General
For expenses and activities of the Office of the Inspector
General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector
General Act of 1978, as amended, $347,000,000, of which
$346,000,000 shall be for operation and maintenance, of which
not to exceed $700,000 is available for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Inspector General, and payments may be made
on the Inspector General's certificate of necessity for
confidential
[[Page H4894]]
military purposes; and of which $1,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2016, shall be for procurement.
TITLE VII
RELATED AGENCIES
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund
For payment to the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement
and Disability System Fund, to maintain the proper funding
level for continuing the operation of the Central
Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System,
$514,000,000.
Intelligence Community Management Account
For necessary expenses of the Intelligence Community
Management Account, $552,535,000.
TITLE VIII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 8001. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not
authorized by the Congress.
Sec. 8002. During the current fiscal year, provisions of
law prohibiting the payment of compensation to, or employment
of, any person not a citizen of the United States shall not
apply to personnel of the Department of Defense: Provided,
That salary increases granted to direct and indirect hire
foreign national employees of the Department of Defense
funded by this Act shall not be at a rate in excess of the
percentage increase authorized by law for civilian employees
of the Department of Defense whose pay is computed under the
provisions of section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, or
at a rate in excess of the percentage increase provided by
the appropriate host nation to its own employees, whichever
is higher: Provided further, That this section shall not
apply to Department of Defense foreign service national
employees serving at United States diplomatic missions whose
pay is set by the Department of State under the Foreign
Service Act of 1980: Provided further, That the limitations
of this provision shall not apply to foreign national
employees of the Department of Defense in the Republic of
Turkey.
Sec. 8003. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year, unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 8004. No more than 20 percent of the appropriations
in this Act which are limited for obligation during the
current fiscal year shall be obligated during the last 2
months of the fiscal year: Provided, That this section shall
not apply to obligations for support of active duty training
of reserve components or summer camp training of the Reserve
Officers' Training Corps.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 8005. Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense
that such action is necessary in the national interest, he
may, with the approval of the Office of Management and
Budget, transfer not to exceed $4,000,000,000 of working
capital funds of the Department of Defense or funds made
available in this Act to the Department of Defense for
military functions (except military construction) between
such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to
be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, and
for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to
which transferred: Provided, That such authority to transfer
may not be used unless for higher priority items, based on
unforeseen military requirements, than those for which
originally appropriated and in no case where the item for
which funds are requested has been denied by the Congress:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall notify
the Congress promptly of all transfers made pursuant to this
authority or any other authority in this Act: Provided
further, That no part of the funds in this Act shall be
available to prepare or present a request to the Committees
on Appropriations for reprogramming of funds, unless for
higher priority items, based on unforeseen military
requirements, than those for which originally appropriated
and in no case where the item for which reprogramming is
requested has been denied by the Congress: Provided further,
That a request for multiple reprogrammings of funds using
authority provided in this section shall be made prior to
June 30, 2014: Provided further, That transfers among
military personnel appropriations shall not be taken into
account for purposes of the limitation on the amount of funds
that may be transferred under this section.
Sec. 8006. (a) With regard to the list of specific
programs, projects, and activities (and the dollar amounts
and adjustments to budget activities corresponding to such
programs, projects, and activities) contained in the tables
titled ``Explanation of Project Level Adjustments'' in the
explanatory statement regarding this Act the obligation and
expenditure of amounts appropriated or otherwise made
available in this Act for those programs, projects, and
activities for which the amounts appropriated exceed the
amounts requested are hereby required by law to be carried
out in the manner provided by such tables to the same extent
as if the tables were included in the text of this Act.
(b) Amounts specified in the referenced tables described in
subsection (a) shall not be treated as subdivisions of
appropriations for purposes of section 8005 of this Act:
Provided, That section 8005 shall apply when transfers of the
amounts described in subsection (a) occur between
appropriation accounts.
Sec. 8007. (a) Not later than 60 days after enactment of
this Act, the Department of Defense shall submit a report to
the congressional defense committees to establish the
baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer
authorities for fiscal year 2014: Provided, That the report
shall include--
(1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column
to display the President's budget request, adjustments made
by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if
appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;
(2) a delineation in the table for each appropriation both
by budget activity and program, project, and activity as
detailed in the Budget Appendix; and
(3) an identification of items of special congressional
interest.
(b) Notwithstanding section 8005 of this Act, none of the
funds provided in this Act shall be available for
reprogramming or transfer until the report identified in
subsection (a) is submitted to the congressional defense
committees, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies in
writing to the congressional defense committees that such
reprogramming or transfer is necessary as an emergency
requirement.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 8008. During the current fiscal year, cash balances
in working capital funds of the Department of Defense
established pursuant to section 2208 of title 10, United
States Code, may be maintained in only such amounts as are
necessary at any time for cash disbursements to be made from
such funds: Provided, That transfers may be made between
such funds: Provided further, That transfers may be made
between working capital funds and the ``Foreign Currency
Fluctuations, Defense'' appropriation and the ``Operation and
Maintenance'' appropriation accounts in such amounts as may
be determined by the Secretary of Defense, with the approval
of the Office of Management and Budget, except that such
transfers may not be made unless the Secretary of Defense has
notified the Congress of the proposed transfer. Except in
amounts equal to the amounts appropriated to working capital
funds in this Act, no obligations may be made against a
working capital fund to procure or increase the value of war
reserve material inventory, unless the Secretary of Defense
has notified the Congress prior to any such obligation.
Sec. 8009. Funds appropriated by this Act may not be used
to initiate a special access program without prior
notification 30 calendar days in advance to the congressional
defense committees.
Sec. 8010. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be
available to initiate: (1) a multiyear contract that employs
economic order quantity procurement in excess of $20,000,000
in any one year of the contract or that includes an unfunded
contingent liability in excess of $20,000,000; or (2) a
contract for advance procurement leading to a multiyear
contract that employs economic order quantity procurement in
excess of $20,000,000 in any one year, unless the
congressional defense committees have been notified at least
30 days in advance of the proposed contract award: Provided,
That no part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall
be available to initiate a multiyear contract for which the
economic order quantity advance procurement is not funded at
least to the limits of the Government's liability: Provided
further, That no part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be available to initiate multiyear procurement
contracts for any systems or component thereof if the value
of the multiyear contract would exceed $500,000,000 unless
specifically provided in this Act: Provided further, That no
multiyear procurement contract can be terminated without 10-
day prior notification to the congressional defense
committees: Provided further, That the execution of
multiyear authority shall require the use of a present value
analysis to determine lowest cost compared to an annual
procurement: Provided further, That none of the funds
provided in this Act may be used for a multiyear contract
executed after the date of the enactment of this Act unless
in the case of any such contract--
(1) the Secretary of Defense has submitted to Congress a
budget request for full funding of units to be procured
through the contract and, in the case of a contract for
procurement of aircraft, that includes, for any aircraft unit
to be procured through the contract for which procurement
funds are requested in that budget request for production
beyond advance procurement activities in the fiscal year
covered by the budget, full funding of procurement of such
unit in that fiscal year;
(2) cancellation provisions in the contract do not include
consideration of recurring manufacturing costs of the
contractor associated with the production of unfunded units
to be delivered under the contract;
(3) the contract provides that payments to the contractor
under the contract shall not be made in advance of incurred
costs on funded units; and
(4) the contract does not provide for a price adjustment
based on a failure to award a follow-on contract.
Funds appropriated in title III of this Act may be used for
a multiyear procurement contract as follows:
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, SSN 774 Virginia class submarine,
KC-130J, C-130J, HC-130J, MC-130J, AC-130J aircraft, Ground-
Based Midcourse Defense System Ground-Based
[[Page H4895]]
Interceptors, and government furnished equipment.
Sec. 8011. Within the funds appropriated for the operation
and maintenance of the Armed Forces, funds are hereby
appropriated pursuant to section 401 of title 10, United
States Code, for humanitarian and civic assistance costs
under chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code. Such funds
may also be obligated for humanitarian and civic assistance
costs incidental to authorized operations and pursuant to
authority granted in section 401 of chapter 20 of title 10,
United States Code, and these obligations shall be reported
as required by section 401(d) of title 10, United States
Code: Provided, That funds available for operation and
maintenance shall be available for providing humanitarian and
similar assistance by using Civic Action Teams in the Trust
Territories of the Pacific Islands and freely associated
states of Micronesia, pursuant to the Compact of Free
Association as authorized by Public Law 99-239: Provided
further, That upon a determination by the Secretary of the
Army that such action is beneficial for graduate medical
education programs conducted at Army medical facilities
located in Hawaii, the Secretary of the Army may authorize
the provision of medical services at such facilities and
transportation to such facilities, on a nonreimbursable
basis, for civilian patients from American Samoa, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Marshall
Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, and Guam.
Sec. 8012. (a) During fiscal year 2014, the civilian
personnel of the Department of Defense may not be managed on
the basis of any end-strength, and the management of such
personnel during that fiscal year shall not be subject to any
constraint or limitation (known as an end-strength) on the
number of such personnel who may be employed on the last day
of such fiscal year.
(b) The fiscal year 2015 budget request for the Department
of Defense as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2015 Department of
Defense budget request shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress as if subsections (a) and (c) of this provision were
effective with regard to fiscal year 2015.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to
military (civilian) technicians.
Sec. 8013. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used in any way, directly or indirectly, to
influence congressional action on any legislation or
appropriation matters pending before the Congress.
Sec. 8014. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be available for the basic pay and allowances of any
member of the Army participating as a full-time student and
receiving benefits paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
from the Department of Defense Education Benefits Fund when
time spent as a full-time student is credited toward
completion of a service commitment: Provided, That this
section shall not apply to those members who have reenlisted
with this option prior to October 1, 1987: Provided further,
That this section applies only to active components of the
Army.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 8015. Funds appropriated in title III of this Act for
the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program may be
transferred to any other appropriation contained in this Act
solely for the purpose of implementing a Mentor-Protege
Program developmental assistance agreement pursuant to
section 831 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note),
as amended, under the authority of this provision or any
other transfer authority contained in this Act.
Sec. 8016. None of the funds in this Act may be available
for the purchase by the Department of Defense (and its
departments and agencies) of welded shipboard anchor and
mooring chain 4 inches in diameter and under unless the
anchor and mooring chain are manufactured in the United
States from components which are substantially manufactured
in the United States: Provided, That for the purpose of this
section, the term ``manufactured'' shall include cutting,
heat treating, quality control, testing of chain and welding
(including the forging and shot blasting process): Provided
further, That for the purpose of this section substantially
all of the components of anchor and mooring chain shall be
considered to be produced or manufactured in the United
States if the aggregate cost of the components produced or
manufactured in the United States exceeds the aggregate cost
of the components produced or manufactured outside the United
States: Provided further, That when adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis, the Secretary of the Service
responsible for the procurement may waive this restriction on
a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations that such an acquisition must be
made in order to acquire capability for national security
purposes.
Sec. 8017. None of the funds available to the Department
of Defense in the current fiscal year and any fiscal year
thereafter may be used to demilitarize or dispose of M-1
Carbines, M-1 Garand rifles, M-14 rifles, .22 caliber rifles,
.30 caliber rifles, or M-1911 pistols, or to demilitarize or
destroy small arms ammunition or ammunition components that
are not otherwise prohibited from commercial sale under
Federal law, unless the small arms ammunition or ammunition
components are certified by the Secretary of the Army or
designee as unserviceable or unsafe for further use.
Sec. 8018. No more than $500,000 of the funds appropriated
or made available in this Act shall be used during a single
fiscal year for any single relocation of an organization,
unit, activity or function of the Department of Defense into
or within the National Capital Region: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
case basis by certifying in writing to the congressional
defense committees that such a relocation is required in the
best interest of the Government.
Sec. 8019. In addition to the funds provided elsewhere in
this Act, $15,000,000 is appropriated only for incentive
payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing
Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544): Provided, That a prime
contractor or a subcontractor at any tier that makes a
subcontract award to any subcontractor or supplier as defined
in section 1544 of title 25, United States Code, or a small
business owned and controlled by an individual or individuals
defined under section 4221(9) of title 25, United States
Code, shall be considered a contractor for the purposes of
being allowed additional compensation under section 504 of
the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544) whenever
the prime contract or subcontract amount is over $500,000 and
involves the expenditure of funds appropriated by an Act
making Appropriations for the Department of Defense with
respect to any fiscal year: Provided further, That
notwithstanding section 1906 of title 41, United States Code,
this section shall be applicable to any Department of Defense
acquisition of supplies or services, including any contract
and any subcontract at any tier for acquisition of commercial
items produced or manufactured, in whole or in part, by any
subcontractor or supplier defined in section 1544 of title
25, United States Code, or a small business owned and
controlled by an individual or individuals defined under
section 4221(9) of title 25, United States Code.
Sec. 8020. Funds appropriated by this Act for the Defense
Media Activity shall not be used for any national or
international political or psychological activities.
Sec. 8021. During the current fiscal year, the Department
of Defense is authorized to incur obligations of not to
exceed $350,000,000 for purposes specified in section
2350j(c) of title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of
receipt of contributions, only from the Government of Kuwait,
under that section: Provided, That upon receipt, such
contributions from the Government of Kuwait shall be credited
to the appropriations or fund which incurred such
obligations.
Sec. 8022. (a) Of the funds made available in this Act, not
less than $39,532,000 shall be available for the Civil Air
Patrol Corporation, of which--
(1) $28,400,000 shall be available from ``Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force'' to support Civil Air Patrol
Corporation operation and maintenance, readiness, counterdrug
activities, and drug demand reduction activities involving
youth programs;
(2) $10,200,000 shall be available from ``Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force''; and
(3) $932,000 shall be available from ``Other Procurement,
Air Force'' for vehicle procurement.
(b) The Secretary of the Air Force should waive
reimbursement for any funds used by the Civil Air Patrol for
counter-drug activities in support of Federal, State, and
local government agencies.
Sec. 8023. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
are available to establish a new Department of Defense
(department) federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC), either as a new entity, or as a separate entity
administrated by an organization managing another FFRDC, or
as a nonprofit membership corporation consisting of a
consortium of other FFRDCs and other nonprofit entities.
(b) No member of a Board of Directors, Trustees, Overseers,
Advisory Group, Special Issues Panel, Visiting Committee, or
any similar entity of a defense FFRDC, and no paid consultant
to any defense FFRDC, except when acting in a technical
advisory capacity, may be compensated for his or her services
as a member of such entity, or as a paid consultant by more
than one FFRDC in a fiscal year: Provided, That a member of
any such entity referred to previously in this subsection
shall be allowed travel expenses and per diem as authorized
under the Federal Joint Travel Regulations, when engaged in
the performance of membership duties.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the
funds available to the department from any source during
fiscal year 2014 may be used by a defense FFRDC, through a
fee or other payment mechanism, for construction of new
buildings, for payment of cost sharing for projects funded by
Government grants, for absorption of contract overruns, or
for certain charitable contributions, not to include employee
participation in community service and/or development.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the
funds available to the department during fiscal year 2014,
not more than 5,750 staff years of technical effort (staff
years) may be funded for defense FFRDCs: Provided, That of
the specific amount referred to previously in this
subsection, not more than 1,125 staff years may be funded for
the defense studies and analysis FFRDCs: Provided further,
That this subsection shall not apply to staff years funded in
the National Intelligence Program (NIP) and the Military
Intelligence Program (MIP).
[[Page H4896]]
(e) The Secretary of Defense shall, with the submission of
the department's fiscal year 2015 budget request, submit a
report presenting the specific amounts of staff years of
technical effort to be allocated for each defense FFRDC
during that fiscal year and the associated budget estimates.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the
total amount appropriated in this Act for FFRDCs is hereby
reduced by $40,000,000.
Sec. 8024. None of the funds appropriated or made
available in this Act shall be used to procure carbon, alloy,
or armor steel plate for use in any Government-owned facility
or property under the control of the Department of Defense
which were not melted and rolled in the United States or
Canada: Provided, That these procurement restrictions shall
apply to any and all Federal Supply Class 9515, American
Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) or American Iron and
Steel Institute (AISI) specifications of carbon, alloy, or
armor steel plate: Provided further, That the Secretary of
the military department responsible for the procurement may
waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying
in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives and the Senate that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes: Provided further, That these restrictions
shall not apply to contracts which are in being as of the
date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 8025. For the purposes of this Act, the term
``congressional defense committees'' means the Armed Services
Committee of the House of Representatives, the Armed Services
Committee of the Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense of the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the
Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives.
Sec. 8026. During the current fiscal year, the Department
of Defense may acquire the modification, depot maintenance
and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the
production of components and other Defense-related articles,
through competition between Department of Defense depot
maintenance activities and private firms: Provided, That the
Senior Acquisition Executive of the military department or
Defense Agency concerned, with power of delegation, shall
certify that successful bids include comparable estimates of
all direct and indirect costs for both public and private
bids: Provided further, That Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-76 shall not apply to competitions conducted under
this section.
Sec. 8027. (a)(1) If the Secretary of Defense, after
consultation with the United States Trade Representative,
determines that a foreign country which is party to an
agreement described in paragraph (2) has violated the terms
of the agreement by discriminating against certain types of
products produced in the United States that are covered by
the agreement, the Secretary of Defense shall rescind the
Secretary's blanket waiver of the Buy American Act with
respect to such types of products produced in that foreign
country.
(2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) is any
reciprocal defense procurement memorandum of understanding,
between the United States and a foreign country pursuant to
which the Secretary of Defense has prospectively waived the
Buy American Act for certain products in that country.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Congress a
report on the amount of Department of Defense purchases from
foreign entities in fiscal year 2014. Such report shall
separately indicate the dollar value of items for which the
Buy American Act was waived pursuant to any agreement
described in subsection (a)(2), the Trade Agreement Act of
1979 (19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), or any international agreement
to which the United States is a party.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term ``Buy American
Act'' means chapter 83 of title 41, United States Code.
Sec. 8028. During the current fiscal year, amounts
contained in the Department of Defense Overseas Military
Facility Investment Recovery Account established by section
2921(c)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991
(Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) shall be available
until expended for the payments specified by section
2921(c)(2) of that Act.
Sec. 8029. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Secretary of the Air Force may convey at no cost to the
Air Force, without consideration, to Indian tribes located in
the States of Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Montana, Oregon, Minnesota, and Washington relocatable
military housing units located at Grand Forks Air Force Base,
Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mountain Home Air Force Base,
Ellsworth Air Force Base, and Minot Air Force Base that are
excess to the needs of the Air Force.
(b) The Secretary of the Air Force shall convey, at no cost
to the Air Force, military housing units under subsection (a)
in accordance with the request for such units that are
submitted to the Secretary by the Operation Walking Shield
Program on behalf of Indian tribes located in the States of
Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon,
Minnesota, and Washington. Any such conveyance shall be
subject to the condition that the housing units shall be
removed within a reasonable period of time, as determined by
the Secretary.
(c) The Operation Walking Shield Program shall resolve any
conflicts among requests of Indian tribes for housing units
under subsection (a) before submitting requests to the
Secretary of the Air Force under subsection (b).
(d) In this section, the term ``Indian tribe'' means any
recognized Indian tribe included on the current list
published by the Secretary of the Interior under section 104
of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe Act of 1994 (Public
Law 103-454; 108 Stat. 4792; 25 U.S.C. 479a-1).
Sec. 8030. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
which are available to the Department of Defense for
operation and maintenance may be used to purchase items
having an investment item unit cost of not more than
$250,000.
Sec. 8031. (a) During the current fiscal year, none of the
appropriations or funds available to the Department of
Defense Working Capital Funds shall be used for the purchase
of an investment item for the purpose of acquiring a new
inventory item for sale or anticipated sale during the
current fiscal year or a subsequent fiscal year to customers
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds if such an
item would not have been chargeable to the Department of
Defense Business Operations Fund during fiscal year 1994 and
if the purchase of such an investment item would be
chargeable during the current fiscal year to appropriations
made to the Department of Defense for procurement.
(b) The fiscal year 2015 budget request for the Department
of Defense, as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2015 Department of
Defense budget, shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress on the basis that any equipment which was classified
as an end item and funded in a procurement appropriation
contained in this Act shall be budgeted for in a proposed
fiscal year 2015 procurement appropriation and not in the
supply management business area or any other area or category
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.
Sec. 8032. None of the funds appropriated by this Act for
programs of the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain
available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year,
except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for
Contingencies, which shall remain available until September
30, 2015: Provided, That funds appropriated, transferred, or
otherwise credited to the Central Intelligence Agency Central
Services Working Capital Fund during this or any prior or
subsequent fiscal year shall remain available until expended:
Provided further, That any funds appropriated or transferred
to the Central Intelligence Agency for advanced research and
development acquisition, for agent operations, and for covert
action programs authorized by the President under section 503
of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3093) shall
remain available until September 30, 2015.
Sec. 8033. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds made available in this Act for the Defense Intelligence
Agency may be used for the design, development, and
deployment of General Defense Intelligence Program
intelligence communications and intelligence information
systems for the Services, the Unified and Specified Commands,
and the component commands.
Sec. 8034. Of the funds appropriated to the Department of
Defense under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', not less than $12,000,000 shall be made
available only for the mitigation of environmental impacts,
including training and technical assistance to tribes,
related administrative support, the gathering of information,
documenting of environmental damage, and developing a system
for prioritization of mitigation and cost to complete
estimates for mitigation, on Indian lands resulting from
Department of Defense activities.
Sec. 8035. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
may be expended by an entity of the Department of Defense
unless the entity, in expending the funds, complies with the
Buy American Act. For purposes of this subsection, the term
``Buy American Act'' means chapter 83 of title 41, United
States Code.
(b) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a person
has been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing
a ``Made in America'' inscription to any product sold in or
shipped to the United States that is not made in America, the
Secretary shall determine, in accordance with section 2410f
of title 10, United States Code, whether the person should be
debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
(c) In the case of any equipment or products purchased with
appropriations provided under this Act, it is the sense of
the Congress that any entity of the Department of Defense, in
expending the appropriation, purchase only American-made
equipment and products, provided that American-made equipment
and products are cost-competitive, quality competitive, and
available in a timely fashion.
Sec. 8036. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be available for a contract for studies, analysis, or
consulting services entered into without competition on the
basis of an unsolicited proposal unless the head of the
activity responsible for the procurement determines--
(1) as a result of thorough technical evaluation, only one
source is found fully qualified to perform the proposed work;
[[Page H4897]]
(2) the purpose of the contract is to explore an
unsolicited proposal which offers significant scientific or
technological promise, represents the product of original
thinking, and was submitted in confidence by one source; or
(3) the purpose of the contract is to take advantage of
unique and significant industrial accomplishment by a
specific concern, or to insure that a new product or idea of
a specific concern is given financial support: Provided, That
this limitation shall not apply to contracts in an amount of
less than $25,000, contracts related to improvements of
equipment that is in development or production, or contracts
as to which a civilian official of the Department of Defense,
who has been confirmed by the Senate, determines that the
award of such contract is in the interest of the national
defense.
Sec. 8037. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and
(c), none of the funds made available by this Act may be
used--
(1) to establish a field operating agency; or
(2) to pay the basic pay of a member of the Armed Forces or
civilian employee of the department who is transferred or
reassigned from a headquarters activity if the member or
employee's place of duty remains at the location of that
headquarters.
(b) The Secretary of Defense or Secretary of a military
department may waive the limitations in subsection (a), on a
case-by-case basis, if the Secretary determines, and
certifies to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate that the granting of the
waiver will reduce the personnel requirements or the
financial requirements of the department.
(c) This section does not apply to--
(1) field operating agencies funded within the National
Intelligence Program;
(2) an Army field operating agency established to
eliminate, mitigate, or counter the effects of improvised
explosive devices, and, as determined by the Secretary of the
Army, other similar threats; or
(3) an Army field operating agency established to improve
the effectiveness and efficiencies of biometric activities
and to integrate common biometric technologies throughout the
Department of Defense.
Sec. 8038. The Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, acting through the Office of Economic
Adjustment of the Department of Defense, may use funds made
available in this Act under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' to make grants and supplement
other Federal funds in accordance with the guidance provided
in the explanatory statement accompanying this Act.
Sec. 8039. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be available to convert to contractor performance an
activity or function of the Department of Defense that, on or
after the date of the enactment of this Act, is performed by
Department of Defense civilian employees unless--
(1) the conversion is based on the result of a public-
private competition that includes a most efficient and cost
effective organization plan developed by such activity or
function;
(2) the Competitive Sourcing Official determines that, over
all performance periods stated in the solicitation of offers
for performance of the activity or function, the cost of
performance of the activity or function by a contractor would
be less costly to the Department of Defense by an amount that
equals or exceeds the lesser of--
(A) 10 percent of the most efficient organization's
personnel-related costs for performance of that activity or
function by Federal employees; or
(B) $10,000,000; and
(3) the contractor does not receive an advantage for a
proposal that would reduce costs for the Department of
Defense by--
(A) not making an employer-sponsored health insurance plan
available to the workers who are to be employed in the
performance of that activity or function under the contract;
or
(B) offering to such workers an employer-sponsored health
benefits plan that requires the employer to contribute less
towards the premium or subscription share than the amount
that is paid by the Department of Defense for health benefits
for civilian employees under chapter 89 of title 5, United
States Code.
(b)(1) The Department of Defense, without regard to
subsection (a) of this section or subsection (a), (b), or (c)
of section 2461 of title 10, United States Code, and
notwithstanding any administrative regulation, requirement,
or policy to the contrary shall have full authority to enter
into a contract for the performance of any commercial or
industrial type function of the Department of Defense that--
(A) is included on the procurement list established
pursuant to section 2 of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (section
8503 of title 41, United States Code);
(B) is planned to be converted to performance by a
qualified nonprofit agency for the blind or by a qualified
nonprofit agency for other severely handicapped individuals
in accordance with that Act; or
(C) is planned to be converted to performance by a
qualified firm under at least 51 percent ownership by an
Indian tribe, as defined in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
450b(e)), or a Native Hawaiian Organization, as defined in
section 8(a)(15) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
637(a)(15)).
(2) This section shall not apply to depot contracts or
contracts for depot maintenance as provided in sections 2469
and 2474 of title 10, United States Code.
(c) The conversion of any activity or function of the
Department of Defense under the authority provided by this
section shall be credited toward any competitive or
outsourcing goal, target, or measurement that may be
established by statute, regulation, or policy and is deemed
to be awarded under the authority of, and in compliance with,
subsection (h) of section 2304 of title 10, United States
Code, for the competition or outsourcing of commercial
activities.
(rescissions)
Sec. 8040. Of the funds appropriated in Department of
Defense Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby
rescinded from the following accounts and programs in the
specified amounts:
``National Defense Sealift Fund, 2011/XXXX'', $28,000,000;
``National Defense Sealift Fund, 2012/XXXX'', $14,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2012/2014'', $30,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014'',
$443,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014'', $10,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $85,000,000;
``Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $5,000,000;
``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2013/ 2017'': CVN-71,
$68,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $3,553,000;
``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2013/2015'', $12,650,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2013/2015'', $60,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2013/2015'', $38,900,000;
``Procurement, Defense-Wide, 2013/2015'', $72,776,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2013/
2014'', $380,861,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2013/
2014'', $49,331,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force,
2013/2014'', $115,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide,
2013/2014'', $213,000,000;
``Ship Modernization Operations and Sustainment Fund, 2013/
2014'', $1,414,500,000.
Sec. 8041. None of the funds available in this Act may be
used to reduce the authorized positions for military
technicians (dual status) of the Army National Guard, Air
National Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve for the
purpose of applying any administratively imposed civilian
personnel ceiling, freeze, or reduction on military
technicians (dual status), unless such reductions are a
direct result of a reduction in military force structure.
Sec. 8042. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this Act may be obligated or expended for
assistance to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.
Sec. 8043. Funds appropriated in this Act for operation
and maintenance of the Military Departments, Combatant
Commands and Defense Agencies shall be available for
reimbursement of pay, allowances and other expenses which
would otherwise be incurred against appropriations for the
National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard
and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence
support to Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint
Intelligence Activities, including the activities and
programs included within the National Intelligence Program
and the Military Intelligence Program: Provided, That nothing
in this section authorizes deviation from established Reserve
and National Guard personnel and training procedures.
Sec. 8044. During the current fiscal year, none of the
funds appropriated in this Act may be used to reduce the
civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to
military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003,
level: Provided, That the Service Surgeons General may waive
this section by certifying to the congressional defense
committees that the beneficiary population is declining in
some catchment areas and civilian strength reductions may be
consistent with responsible resource stewardship and
capitation-based budgeting.
Sec. 8045. (a) None of the funds available to the
Department of Defense for any fiscal year for drug
interdiction or counter-drug activities may be transferred to
any other department or agency of the United States except as
specifically provided in an appropriations law.
(b) None of the funds available to the Central Intelligence
Agency for any fiscal year for drug interdiction and counter-
drug activities may be transferred to any other department or
agency of the United States except as specifically provided
in an appropriations law.
Sec. 8046. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other
than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic
origin: Provided, That the Secretary of the military
department responsible for such procurement may waive this
restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing
to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such
[[Page H4898]]
an acquisition must be made in order to acquire capability
for national security purposes: Provided further, That this
restriction shall not apply to the purchase of ``commercial
items'', as defined by section 4(12) of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act, except that the restriction shall
apply to ball or roller bearings purchased as end items.
Sec. 8047. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
purchase any supercomputer which is not manufactured in the
United States, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to
the congressional defense committees that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes that is not available from United States
manufacturers.
Sec. 8048. None of the funds made available in this or any
other Act may be used to pay the salary of any officer or
employee of the Department of Defense who approves or
implements the transfer of administrative responsibilities or
budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity
financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal
agency not financed by this Act without the express
authorization of Congress: Provided, That this limitation
shall not apply to transfers of funds expressly provided for
in Defense Appropriations Acts, or provisions of Acts
providing supplemental appropriations for the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 8049. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
none of the funds available to the Department of Defense for
the current fiscal year may be obligated or expended to
transfer to another nation or an international organization
any defense articles or services (other than intelligence
services) for use in the activities described in subsection
(b) unless the congressional defense committees, the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives,
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate are
notified 15 days in advance of such transfer.
(b) This section applies to--
(1) any international peacekeeping or peace-enforcement
operation under the authority of chapter VI or chapter VII of
the United Nations Charter under the authority of a United
Nations Security Council resolution; and
(2) any other international peacekeeping, peace-
enforcement, or humanitarian assistance operation.
(c) A notice under subsection (a) shall include the
following:
(1) A description of the equipment, supplies, or services
to be transferred.
(2) A statement of the value of the equipment, supplies, or
services to be transferred.
(3) In the case of a proposed transfer of equipment or
supplies--
(A) a statement of whether the inventory requirements of
all elements of the Armed Forces (including the reserve
components) for the type of equipment or supplies to be
transferred have been met; and
(B) a statement of whether the items proposed to be
transferred will have to be replaced and, if so, how the
President proposes to provide funds for such replacement.
Sec. 8050. None of the funds available to the Department
of Defense under this Act shall be obligated or expended to
pay a contractor under a contract with the Department of
Defense for costs of any amount paid by the contractor to an
employee when--
(1) such costs are for a bonus or otherwise in excess of
the normal salary paid by the contractor to the employee; and
(2) such bonus is part of restructuring costs associated
with a business combination.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8051. During the current fiscal year, no more than
$30,000,000 of appropriations made in this Act under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be
transferred to appropriations available for the pay of
military personnel, to be merged with, and to be available
for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred, to be used in support of such personnel in
connection with support and services for eligible
organizations and activities outside the Department of
Defense pursuant to section 2012 of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 8052. During the current fiscal year, in the case of
an appropriation account of the Department of Defense for
which the period of availability for obligation has expired
or which has closed under the provisions of section 1552 of
title 31, United States Code, and which has a negative
unliquidated or unexpended balance, an obligation or an
adjustment of an obligation may be charged to any current
appropriation account for the same purpose as the expired or
closed account if--
(1) the obligation would have been properly chargeable
(except as to amount) to the expired or closed account before
the end of the period of availability or closing of that
account;
(2) the obligation is not otherwise properly chargeable to
any current appropriation account of the Department of
Defense; and
(3) in the case of an expired account, the obligation is
not chargeable to a current appropriation of the Department
of Defense under the provisions of section 1405(b)(8) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991,
Public Law 101-510, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1551 note):
Provided, That in the case of an expired account, if
subsequent review or investigation discloses that there was
not in fact a negative unliquidated or unexpended balance in
the account, any charge to a current account under the
authority of this section shall be reversed and recorded
against the expired account: Provided further, That the
total amount charged to a current appropriation under this
section may not exceed an amount equal to 1 percent of the
total appropriation for that account.
Sec. 8053. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau may permit the use of
equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project by
any person or entity on a space-available, reimbursable
basis. The Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall establish
the amount of reimbursement for such use on a case-by-case
basis.
(b) Amounts collected under subsection (a) shall be
credited to funds available for the National Guard Distance
Learning Project and be available to defray the costs
associated with the use of equipment of the project under
that subsection. Such funds shall be available for such
purposes without fiscal year limitation.
Sec. 8054. Using funds made available by this Act or any
other Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, pursuant to a
determination under section 2690 of title 10, United States
Code, may implement cost-effective agreements for required
heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military
Community in the Federal Republic of Germany: Provided, That
in the City of Kaiserslautern and at the Rhine Ordnance
Barracks area, such agreements will include the use of United
States anthracite as the base load energy for municipal
district heat to the United States Defense installations:
Provided further, That at Landstuhl Army Regional Medical
Center and Ramstein Air Base, furnished heat may be obtained
from private, regional or municipal services, if provisions
are included for the consideration of United States coal as
an energy source.
Sec. 8055. None of the funds appropriated in title IV of
this Act may be used to procure end-items for delivery to
military forces for operational training, operational use or
inventory requirements: Provided, That this restriction does
not apply to end-items used in development, prototyping, and
test activities preceding and leading to acceptance for
operational use: Provided further, That this restriction does
not apply to programs funded within the National Intelligence
Program: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may
waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying
in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives and the Senate that it is in the national
security interest to do so.
Sec. 8056. (a) The Secretary of Defense may, on a case-by-
case basis, waive with respect to a foreign country each
limitation on the procurement of defense items from foreign
sources provided in law if the Secretary determines that the
application of the limitation with respect to that country
would invalidate cooperative programs entered into between
the Department of Defense and the foreign country, or would
invalidate reciprocal trade agreements for the procurement of
defense items entered into under section 2531 of title 10,
United States Code, and the country does not discriminate
against the same or similar defense items produced in the
United States for that country.
(b) Subsection (a) applies with respect to--
(1) contracts and subcontracts entered into on or after the
date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) options for the procurement of items that are exercised
after such date under contracts that are entered into before
such date if the option prices are adjusted for any reason
other than the application of a waiver granted under
subsection (a).
(c) Subsection (a) does not apply to a limitation regarding
construction of public vessels, ball and roller bearings,
food, and clothing or textile materials as defined by section
11 (chapters 50-65) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and
products classified under headings 4010, 4202, 4203, 6401
through 6406, 6505, 7019, 7218 through 7229, 7304.41 through
7304.49, 7306.40, 7502 through 7508, 8105, 8108, 8109, 8211,
8215, and 9404.
Sec. 8057. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to support any training program involving a unit
of the security forces or police of a foreign country if the
Secretary of Defense has received credible information from
the Department of State that the unit has committed a gross
violation of human rights, unless all necessary corrective
steps have been taken.
(b) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, shall ensure that prior to a decision to
conduct any training program referred to in subsection (a),
full consideration is given to all credible information
available to the Department of State relating to human rights
violations by foreign security forces.
(c) The Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the
Secretary of State, may waive the prohibition in subsection
(a) if he determines that such waiver is required by
extraordinary circumstances.
(d) Not more than 15 days after the exercise of any waiver
under subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense shall submit a
report to the congressional defense committees describing the
extraordinary circumstances, the purpose and duration of the
training program, the United States forces and the foreign
security forces involved in the training program, and the
information relating to human rights violations that
necessitates the waiver.
Sec. 8058. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this or other Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts may be obligated or expended for the
purpose
[[Page H4899]]
of performing repairs or maintenance to military family
housing units of the Department of Defense, including areas
in such military family housing units that may be used for
the purpose of conducting official Department of Defense
business.
Sec. 8059. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds appropriated in this Act under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' for any new
start advanced concept technology demonstration project or
joint capability demonstration project may only be obligated
45 days after a report, including a description of the
project, the planned acquisition and transition strategy and
its estimated annual and total cost, has been provided in
writing to the congressional defense committees: Provided,
That the Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a
case-by-case basis by certifying to the congressional defense
committees that it is in the national interest to do so.
Sec. 8060. The Secretary of Defense shall provide a
classified quarterly report beginning 30 days after enactment
of this Act, to the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees, Subcommittees on Defense on certain matters as
directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act.
Sec. 8061. During the current fiscal year, none of the
funds available to the Department of Defense may be used to
provide support to another department or agency of the United
States if such department or agency is more than 90 days in
arrears in making payment to the Department of Defense for
goods or services previously provided to such department or
agency on a reimbursable basis: Provided, That this
restriction shall not apply if the department is authorized
by law to provide support to such department or agency on a
nonreimbursable basis, and is providing the requested support
pursuant to such authority: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
case basis by certifying in writing to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
that it is in the national security interest to do so.
Sec. 8062. Notwithstanding section 12310(b) of title 10,
United States Code, a Reserve who is a member of the National
Guard serving on full-time National Guard duty under section
502(f) of title 32, United States Code, may perform duties in
support of the ground-based elements of the National
Ballistic Missile Defense System.
Sec. 8063. None of the funds provided in this Act may be
used to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition
held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire
cartridge and a United States military nomenclature
designation of ``armor penetrator'', ``armor piercing (AP)'',
``armor piercing incendiary (API)'', or ``armor-piercing
incendiary tracer (API-T)'', except to an entity performing
demilitarization services for the Department of Defense under
a contract that requires the entity to demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Department of Defense that armor piercing
projectiles are either: (1) rendered incapable of reuse by
the demilitarization process; or (2) used to manufacture
ammunition pursuant to a contract with the Department of
Defense or the manufacture of ammunition for export pursuant
to a License for Permanent Export of Unclassified Military
Articles issued by the Department of State.
Sec. 8064. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, or his designee, may
waive payment of all or part of the consideration that
otherwise would be required under section 2667 of title 10,
United States Code, in the case of a lease of personal
property for a period not in excess of 1 year to any
organization specified in section 508(d) of title 32, United
States Code, or any other youth, social, or fraternal
nonprofit organization as may be approved by the Chief of the
National Guard Bureau, or his designee, on a case-by-case
basis.
Sec. 8065. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be used for the support of any nonappropriated funds
activity of the Department of Defense that procures malt
beverages and wine with nonappropriated funds for resale
(including such alcoholic beverages sold by the drink) on a
military installation located in the United States unless
such malt beverages and wine are procured within that State,
or in the case of the District of Columbia, within the
District of Columbia, in which the military installation is
located: Provided, That in a case in which the military
installation is located in more than one State, purchases may
be made in any State in which the installation is located:
Provided further, That such local procurement requirements
for malt beverages and wine shall apply to all alcoholic
beverages only for military installations in States which are
not contiguous with another State: Provided further, That
alcoholic beverages other than wine and malt beverages, in
contiguous States and the District of Columbia shall be
procured from the most competitive source, price and other
factors considered.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8066. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $108,725,800
shall remain available until expended: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Defense is authorized to transfer such funds to other
activities of the Federal Government: Provided further, That
the Secretary of Defense is authorized to enter into and
carry out contracts for the acquisition of real property,
construction, personal services, and operations related to
projects carrying out the purposes of this section: Provided
further, That contracts entered into under the authority of
this section may provide for such indemnification as the
Secretary determines to be necessary: Provided further, That
projects authorized by this section shall comply with
applicable Federal, State, and local law to the maximum
extent consistent with the national security, as determined
by the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 8067. Section 8106 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1997 (titles I through VIII of the matter
under subsection 101(b) of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat.
3009-111; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) shall continue in effect to
apply to disbursements that are made by the Department of
Defense in fiscal year 2014.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8068. During the current fiscal year, not to exceed
$200,000,000 from funds available under ``Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be transferred to the
Department of State ``Global Security Contingency Fund'':
Provided, That this transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall, not fewer than 30 days prior to making transfers to
the Department of State ``Global Security Contingency Fund'',
notify the congressional defense committees in writing with
the source of funds and a detailed justification, execution
plan, and timeline for each proposed project.
Sec. 8069. In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in
this Act, $4,000,000 is hereby appropriated to the Department
of Defense, to remain available for obligation until
expended: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision
of law, that upon the determination of the Secretary of
Defense that it shall serve the national interest, these
funds shall be available only for a grant to the Fisher House
Foundation, Inc., only for the construction and furnishing of
additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family
members when confronted with the illness or hospitalization
of an eligible military beneficiary.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8070. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under
the headings ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' and ``Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'',
$489,091,000 shall be for the Israeli Cooperative Programs:
Provided, That of this amount, $220,309,000 shall be for the
Secretary of Defense to provide to the Government of Israel
for the procurement of the Iron Dome defense system to
counter short-range rocket threats; $149,712,000 shall be for
the Short Range Ballistic Missile Defense (SRBMD) program,
including cruise missile defense research and development
under the SRBMD program, of which $15,000,000 shall be for
production activities of SRBMD missiles in the United States
and in Israel to meet Israel's defense requirements
consistent with each nation's laws, regulations, and
procedures; $74,707,000 shall be available for an upper-tier
component to the Israeli Missile Defense Architecture, and
$44,363,000 shall be available for the Arrow System
Improvement Program including development of a long range,
ground and airborne, detection suite: Provided further, That
funds made available under this provision for production of
missiles and missile components may be transferred to
appropriations available for the procurement of weapons and
equipment, to be merged with and to be available for the same
time period and the same purposes as the appropriation to
which transferred: Provided further, That the transfer
authority provided under this provision is in addition to any
other transfer authority provided in this Act.
Sec. 8071. (a) None of the funds available to the
Department of Defense may be obligated to modify command and
control relationships to give Fleet Forces Command
operational and administrative control of U.S. Navy forces
assigned to the Pacific fleet.
(b) None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense may be obligated to modify command and control
relationships to give United States Transportation Command
operational and administrative control of C-130 and KC-135
forces assigned to the Pacific and European Air Force
Commands.
(c) The command and control relationships in subsections
(a) and (b) which existed on March 13, 2011, shall remain in
force unless changes are specifically authorized in a
subsequent Act.
(d) This subsection does not apply to administrative
control of Navy Air and Missile Defense Command.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8072. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under
the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'',
$625,800,000 shall be available until September 30, 2014, to
fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases: Provided, That
upon enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall
transfer funds to the following appropriations in the amounts
specified: Provided further, That the amounts transferred
shall be merged with and be available for the same purposes
as the appropriations to which transferred to:
(1) Under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
2007/2014'': LHA Replacement Program $37,700,000; and
[[Page H4900]]
(2) Under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
2008/2014'': Carrier Replacement Program $588,100,000.
Sec. 8073. Funds appropriated by this Act, or made
available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for
intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically
authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504 of the
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3094) during fiscal
year 2014 until the enactment of the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
Sec. 8074. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be
available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming of funds that creates or initiates a new
program, project, or activity unless such program, project,
or activity must be undertaken immediately in the interest of
national security and only after written prior notification
to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 8075. The budget of the President for fiscal year
2015 submitted to the Congress pursuant to section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code, shall include separate budget
justification documents for costs of United States Armed
Forces' participation in contingency operations for the
Military Personnel accounts, the Operation and Maintenance
accounts, and the Procurement accounts: Provided, That these
documents shall include a description of the funding
requested for each contingency operation, for each military
service, to include all Active and Reserve components, and
for each appropriations account: Provided further, That
these documents shall include estimated costs for each
element of expense or object class, a reconciliation of
increases and decreases for each contingency operation, and
programmatic data including, but not limited to, troop
strength for each Active and Reserve component, and estimates
of the major weapons systems deployed in support of each
contingency: Provided further, That these documents shall
include budget exhibits OP-5 and OP-32 (as defined in the
Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation) for
all contingency operations for the budget year and the two
preceding fiscal years.
Sec. 8076. None of the funds in this Act may be used for
research, development, test, evaluation, procurement, or
deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense
system.
Sec. 8077. In addition to the amounts appropriated or
otherwise made available elsewhere in this Act, $44,000,000
is hereby appropriated to the Department of Defense:
Provided, That upon the determination of the Secretary of
Defense that it shall serve the national interest, he shall
make grants in the amounts specified as follows: $20,000,000
to the United Service Organizations and $24,000,000 to the
Red Cross.
Sec. 8078. None of the funds appropriated or made
available in this Act shall be used to reduce or disestablish
the operation of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of
the Air Force Reserve, if such action would reduce the WC-130
Weather Reconnaissance mission below the levels funded in
this Act: Provided, That the Air Force shall allow the 53rd
Weather Reconnaissance Squadron to perform other missions in
support of national defense requirements during the non-
hurricane season.
Sec. 8079. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be
available for integration of foreign intelligence information
unless the information has been lawfully collected and
processed during the conduct of authorized foreign
intelligence activities: Provided, That information
pertaining to United States persons shall only be handled in
accordance with protections provided in the Fourth Amendment
of the United States Constitution as implemented through
Executive Order No. 12333.
Sec. 8080. (a) At the time members of reserve components of
the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active duty under
section 12302(a) of title 10, United States Code, each member
shall be notified in writing of the expected period during
which the member will be mobilized.
(b) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirements of
subsection (a) in any case in which the Secretary determines
that it is necessary to do so to respond to a national
security emergency or to meet dire operational requirements
of the Armed Forces.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8081. The Secretary of Defense may transfer funds
from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to
any available Navy ship construction appropriation for the
purpose of liquidating necessary changes resulting from
inflation, market fluctuations, or rate adjustments for any
ship construction program appropriated in law: Provided,
That the Secretary may transfer not to exceed $100,000,000
under the authority provided by this section: Provided
further, That the Secretary may not transfer any funds until
30 days after the proposed transfer has been reported to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate, unless a response from the Committees is
received sooner: Provided further, That any funds
transferred pursuant to this section shall retain the same
period of availability as when originally appropriated:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided by
this section is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.
Sec. 8082. For purposes of section 7108 of title 41,
United States Code, any subdivision of appropriations made
under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' that
is not closed at the time reimbursement is made shall be
available to reimburse the Judgment Fund and shall be
considered for the same purposes as any subdivision under the
heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' appropriations
in the current fiscal year or any prior fiscal year.
Sec. 8083. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act
may be used to transfer research and development,
acquisition, or other program authority relating to current
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAVs) from the Army.
(b) The Army shall retain responsibility for and
operational control of the MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) in order to support the Secretary of Defense in
matters relating to the employment of unmanned aerial
vehicles.
Sec. 8084. Up to $15,000,000 of the funds appropriated
under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' may be
made available for the Asia Pacific Regional Initiative
Program for the purpose of enabling the Pacific Command to
execute Theater Security Cooperation activities such as
humanitarian assistance, and payment of incremental and
personnel costs of training and exercising with foreign
security forces: Provided, That funds made available for
this purpose may be used, notwithstanding any other funding
authorities for humanitarian assistance, security assistance
or combined exercise expenses: Provided further, That funds
may not be obligated to provide assistance to any foreign
country that is otherwise prohibited from receiving such type
of assistance under any other provision of law.
Sec. 8085. None of the funds appropriated by this Act for
programs of the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence shall remain available for obligation beyond the
current fiscal year, except for funds appropriated for
research and technology, which shall remain available until
September 30, 2015.
Sec. 8086. For purposes of section 1553(b) of title 31,
United States Code, any subdivision of appropriations made in
this Act under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion,
Navy'' shall be considered to be for the same purpose as any
subdivision under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion,
Navy'' appropriations in any prior fiscal year, and the 1
percent limitation shall apply to the total amount of the
appropriation.
Sec. 8087. (a) Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence
shall submit a report to the congressional intelligence
committees to establish the baseline for application of
reprogramming and transfer authorities for fiscal year 2014:
Provided, That the report shall include--
(1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column
to display the President's budget request, adjustments made
by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if
appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;
(2) a delineation in the table for each appropriation by
Expenditure Center and project; and
(3) an identification of items of special congressional
interest.
(b) None of the funds provided for the National
Intelligence Program in this Act shall be available for
reprogramming or transfer until the report identified in
subsection (a) is submitted to the congressional intelligence
committees, unless the Director of National Intelligence
certifies in writing to the congressional intelligence
committees that such reprogramming or transfer is necessary
as an emergency requirement.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8088. Of the funds appropriated in the Intelligence
Community Management Account for the Program Manager for the
Information Sharing Environment, $20,000,000 is available for
transfer by the Director of National Intelligence to other
departments and agencies for purposes of Government-wide
information sharing activities: Provided, That funds
transferred under this provision are to be merged with and
available for the same purposes and time period as the
appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That
the Office of Management and Budget must approve any
transfers made under this provision.
Sec. 8089. (a) None of the funds provided for the National
Intelligence Program in this or any prior appropriations Act
shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section
102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
3024(d)) that--
(1) creates a new start effort;
(2) terminates a program with appropriated funding of
$10,000,000 or more;
(3) transfers funding into or out of the National
Intelligence Program; or
(4) transfers funding between appropriations,
unless the congressional intelligence committees are notified
30 days in advance of such reprogramming of funds; this
notification period may be reduced for urgent national
security requirements.
(b) None of the funds provided for the National
Intelligence Program in this or any prior appropriations Act
shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section
102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
3024(d)) that results in a cumulative increase or decrease of
[[Page H4901]]
the levels specified in the classified annex accompanying
this Act unless the congressional intelligence committees are
notified 30 days in advance of such reprogramming of funds;
this notification period may be reduced for urgent national
security requirements.
Sec. 8090. The Director of National Intelligence shall
submit to Congress each year, at or about the time that the
President's budget is submitted to Congress that year under
section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a future-
years intelligence program (including associated annexes)
reflecting the estimated expenditures and proposed
appropriations included in that budget. Any such future-years
intelligence program shall cover the fiscal year with respect
to which the budget is submitted and at least the four
succeeding fiscal years.
Sec. 8091. For the purposes of this Act, the term
``congressional intelligence committees'' means the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the
Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the
Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate.
Sec. 8092. The Department of Defense shall continue to
report incremental contingency operations costs for Operation
Enduring Freedom, or any other named operations in the U.S.
Central Command area of operation on a monthly basis in the
Cost of War Execution Report as prescribed in the Department
of Defense Financial Management Regulation Department of
Defense Instruction 7000.14, Volume 12, Chapter 23
``Contingency Operations'', Annex 1, dated September 2005.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8093. During the current fiscal year, not to exceed
$11,000,000 from each of the appropriations made in title II
of this Act for ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'',
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', and ``Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force'' may be transferred by the military
department concerned to its central fund established for
Fisher Houses and Suites pursuant to section 2493(d) of title
10, United States Code.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8094. Funds appropriated by this Act may be available
for the purpose of making remittances and transfers to the
Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund in accordance
with the requirements of section 1705 of title 10, United
States Code.
Sec. 8095. (a) Any agency receiving funds made available in
this Act, shall, subject to subsections (b) and (c), post on
the public website of that agency any report required to be
submitted by the Congress in this or any other Act, upon the
determination by the head of the agency that it shall serve
the national interest.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to a report if--
(1) the public posting of the report compromises national
security; or
(2) the report contains proprietary information.
(c) The head of the agency posting such report shall do so
only after such report has been made available to the
requesting Committee or Committees of Congress for no less
than 45 days.
Sec. 8096. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act may be expended for any Federal
contract for an amount in excess of $1,000,000, unless the
contractor agrees not to--
(1) enter into any agreement with any of its employees or
independent contractors that requires, as a condition of
employment, that the employee or independent contractor agree
to resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or
arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including
assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional
distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring,
supervision, or retention; or
(2) take any action to enforce any provision of an existing
agreement with an employee or independent contractor that
mandates that the employee or independent contractor resolve
through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of
sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery,
intentional infliction of emotional distress, false
imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
(b) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be expended for any Federal
contract unless the contractor certifies that it requires
each covered subcontractor to agree not to enter into, and
not to take any action to enforce any provision of, any
agreement as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subsection (a), with respect to any employee or independent
contractor performing work related to such subcontract. For
purposes of this subsection, a ``covered subcontractor'' is
an entity that has a subcontract in excess of $1,000,000 on a
contract subject to subsection (a).
(c) The prohibitions in this section do not apply with
respect to a contractor's or subcontractor's agreements with
employees or independent contractors that may not be enforced
in a court of the United States.
(d) The Secretary of Defense may waive the application of
subsection (a) or (b) to a particular contractor or
subcontractor for the purposes of a particular contract or
subcontract if the Secretary or the Deputy Secretary
personally determines that the waiver is necessary to avoid
harm to national security interests of the United States, and
that the term of the contract or subcontract is not longer
than necessary to avoid such harm. The determination shall
set forth with specificity the grounds for the waiver and for
the contract or subcontract term selected, and shall state
any alternatives considered in lieu of a waiver and the
reasons each such alternative would not avoid harm to
national security interests of the United States. The
Secretary of Defense shall transmit to Congress, and
simultaneously make public, any determination under this
subsection not less than 15 business days before the contract
or subcontract addressed in the determination may be awarded.
Sec. 8097. None of the funds made available under this Act
may be distributed to the Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8098. From within the funds appropriated for
operation and maintenance for the Defense Health Program in
this Act, up to $143,087,000, shall be available for transfer
to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund in accordance
with the provisions of section 1704 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Public Law 111-84:
Provided, That for purposes of section 1704(b), the facility
operations funded are operations of the integrated Captain
James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center, consisting of the
North Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center, the Navy
Ambulatory Care Center, and supporting facilities designated
as a combined Federal medical facility as described by
section 706 of Public Law 110-417: Provided further, That
additional funds may be transferred from funds appropriated
for operation and maintenance for the Defense Health Program
to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund upon written
notification by the Secretary of Defense to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate.
Sec. 8099. The Office of the Director of National
Intelligence shall not employ more Senior Executive employees
than are specified in the classified annex.
Sec. 8100. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act may be obligated or expended to
pay a retired general or flag officer to serve as a senior
mentor advising the Department of Defense unless such retired
officer files a Standard Form 278 (or successor form
concerning public financial disclosure under part 2634 of
title 5, Code of Federal Regulations) to the Office of
Government Ethics.
Sec. 8101. Appropriations available to the Department of
Defense may be used for the purchase of heavy and light
armored vehicles for the physical security of personnel or
for force protection purposes up to a limit of $250,000 per
vehicle, notwithstanding price or other limitations
applicable to the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles.
Sec. 8102. Of the amounts appropriated for ``Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' the following amounts shall be
available to the Secretary of Defense, for the following
authorized purposes, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment of the
Department of Defense, to make grants, concluded cooperative
agreements, and supplement other Federal funds, to remain
available until expended, to support critical existing and
enduring military installation and missions on Guam, as well
as any potential Department of Defense growth: (1)
$133,700,000 for addressing the need for civilian water and
wastewater improvements, and (2) $12,868,000 for construction
of a regional public health laboratory: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to
obligating funds for either of the forgoing purposes, notify
the congressional defense committees in writing of the
details of any such obligation.
Sec. 8103. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used by the Secretary of Defense to take beneficial
occupancy of more than 2,500 parking spaces (other than
handicap-reserved spaces) to be provided by the BRAC 133
project: Provided, That this limitation may be waived in
part if: (1) the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress
that levels of service at existing intersections in the
vicinity of the project have not experienced failing levels
of service as defined by the Transportation Research Board
Highway Capacity Manual over a consecutive 90-day period; (2)
the Department of Defense and the Virginia Department of
Transportation agree on the number of additional parking
spaces that may be made available to employees of the
facility subject to continued 90-day traffic monitoring; and
(3) the Secretary of Defense notifies the congressional
defense committees in writing at least 14 days prior to
exercising this waiver of the number of additional parking
spaces to be made available.
Sec. 8104. The Secretary of Defense shall report quarterly
the numbers of civilian personnel end strength by
appropriation account for each and every appropriation
account used to finance Federal civilian personnel salaries
to the congressional defense committees within 15 days after
the end of each fiscal quarter.
Sec. 8105. (a) None of the funds made available in this or
any other Act may be used to study alternatives, plan,
prepare, or otherwise take any action to--
[[Page H4902]]
(1) separate the budget, accounts, or disbursement system
for the National Intelligence Program from the budget,
accounts, or disbursement system for the Department of
Defense; or
(2) consolidate the budget, accounts, or disbursement
system for the National Intelligence Program within the
budget, accounts, or disbursement system for the Department
of Defense.
(b) The activities prohibited under subsection (a)
include--
(1) the study, planning, preparation, or submission of a
budget request that modifies the appropriations account
structures as in effect on the date of the enactment of this
Act for any Department of Defense account containing funds
for the National Intelligence Program;
(2) the establishment of a new appropriations account for
part or all of the National Intelligence Program;
(3) the study or implementation of a funds disbursement
system for the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence; and
(4) any other action to study, prepare, or submit a budget
request to Congress that includes any modifications
prohibited by this section.
(c) In this section:
(1) The term ``account'' includes an appropriations
account.
(2) The term ``disbursement system'' includes any system
with accounting, cost accrual, fund distribution, or
disbursement functions.
(3) The term ``National Intelligence Program'' has the
meaning given the term in section 3 of the National Security
Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003).
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8106. Upon a determination by the Director of
National Intelligence that such action is necessary and in
the national interest, the Director may, with the approval of
the Office of Management and Budget, transfer not to exceed
$2,000,000,000 of the funds made available in this Act for
the National Intelligence Program: Provided, That such
authority to transfer may not be used unless for higher
priority items, based on unforeseen intelligence
requirements, than those for which originally appropriated
and in no case where the item for which funds are requested
has been denied by the Congress: Provided further, That a
request for multiple reprogrammings of funds using authority
provided in this section shall be made prior to June 30,
2014.
Sec. 8107. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this or any other Act may be used to
transfer, release, or assist in the transfer or release to or
within the United States, its territories, or possessions
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other detainee who--
(1) is not a United States citizen or a member of the Armed
Forces of the United States; and
(2) is or was held on or after June 24, 2009, at the United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department
of Defense.
Sec. 8108. (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) and
subsection (d), none of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this or any other Act may be used to
transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody
or control of the individual's country of origin, any other
foreign country, or any other foreign entity unless the
Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the certification
described in subsection (b) not later than 30 days before the
transfer of the individual.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by
the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at
Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the disposition
of the individual that is issued by a court or competent
tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction
(which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after
issuance).
(b) A certification described in this subsection is a
written certification made by the Secretary of Defense, with
the concurrence of the Secretary of State, and in
consultation with the Director of National Intelligence,
that--
(1) the government of the foreign country or the recognized
leadership of the foreign entity to which the individual
detained at Guantanamo is to be transferred--
(A) is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism or a
designated foreign terrorist organization;
(B) maintains control over each detention facility in which
the individual is to be detained if the individual is to be
housed in a detention facility;
(C) is not, as of the date of the certification, facing a
threat that is likely to substantially affect its ability to
exercise control over the individual;
(D) has taken or agreed to take effective actions to ensure
that the individual cannot take action to threaten the United
States, its citizens, or its allies in the future;
(E) has taken or agreed to take such actions as the
Secretary of Defense determines are necessary to ensure that
the individual cannot engage or re-engage in any terrorist
activity; and
(F) has agreed to share with the United States any
information that--
(i) is related to the individual or any associates of the
individual; and
(ii) could affect the security of the United States, its
citizens, or its allies; and
(2) includes an assessment, in classified or unclassified
form, of the capacity, willingness, and past practices (if
applicable) of the foreign country or entity in relation to
the Secretary's certifications.
(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection
(d), none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available in this or any other Act may be used to transfer
any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or
control of the individual's country of origin, any other
foreign country, or any other foreign entity if there is a
confirmed case of any individual who was detained at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at any time after
September 11, 2001, who was transferred to such foreign
country or entity and subsequently engaged in any terrorist
activity.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by
the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at
Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the disposition
of the individual that is issued by a court or competent
tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction
(which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after
issuance).
(d)(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive the applicability
to a detainee transfer of a certification requirement
specified in subparagraph (D) or (E) of subsection (b)(1) or
the prohibition in subsection (c), if the Secretary certifies
the rest of the criteria required by subsection (b) for
transfers prohibited by (c) and, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State and in consultation with the Director of
National Intelligence, determines that--
(A) alternative actions will be taken to address the
underlying purpose of the requirement or requirements to be
waived;
(B) in the case of a waiver of subparagraph (D) or (E) of
subsection (b)(1), it is not possible to certify that the
risks addressed in the paragraph to be waived have been
completely eliminated, but the actions to be taken under
subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate such risks with
regard to the individual to be transferred;
(C) in the case of a waiver of subsection (c), the
Secretary has considered any confirmed case in which an
individual who was transferred to the country subsequently
engaged in terrorist activity, and the actions to be taken
under subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate the risk
of recidivism with regard to the individual to be
transferred; and
(D) the transfer is in the national security interests of
the United States.
(2) Whenever the Secretary makes a determination under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress, not later than 30 days before the
transfer of the individual concerned, the following:
(A) A copy of the determination and the waiver concerned.
(B) A statement of the basis for the determination,
including--
(i) an explanation why the transfer is in the national
security interests of the United States; and
(ii) in the case of a waiver of subparagraph (D) or (E) of
subsection (b)(1), an explanation why it is not possible to
certify that the risks addressed in the paragraph to be
waived have been completely eliminated.
(C) A summary of the alternative actions to be taken to
address the underlying purpose of, and to mitigate the risks
addressed in, the paragraph or subsection to be waived.
(D) The assessment required by subsection (b)(2).
(e) In assessing the risk that an individual detained at
Guantanamo will engage in terrorist activity or other actions
that could affect the security of the United States if
released for the purpose of making a certification under
subsection (b) or a waiver under subsection (d), the
Secretary of Defense may give favorable consideration to any
such individual--
(1) who has substantially cooperated with United States
intelligence and law enforcement authorities, pursuant to a
pre- trial agreement, while in the custody of or under the
effective control of the Department of Defense; and
(2) for whom agreements and effective mechanisms are in
place, to the extent relevant and necessary, to provide for
continued cooperation with United States intelligence and law
enforcement authorities.
(f) In this section:
(1) The term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Appropriations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of
the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Appropriations, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
(2) The term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' means
any individual located at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
(A) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(B) is--
(i) in the custody or under the control of the Department
of Defense; or
(ii) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(3) The term ``foreign terrorist organization'' means any
organization so designated by the Secretary of State under
section 219
[[Page H4903]]
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).
Sec. 8109. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this or any other Act may be used to
construct, acquire, or modify any facility in the United
States, its territories, or possessions to house any
individual described in subsection (c) for the purposes of
detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the
effective control of the Department of Defense.
(b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to
any modification of facilities at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(c) An individual described in this subsection is any
individual who, as of June 24, 2009, is located at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who--
(1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(2) is--
(A) in the custody or under the effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Sec. 8110. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that any unpaid Federal tax liability has been assessed, for
which all judicial and administrative remedies have been
exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a
timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the
awarding agency is aware of the unpaid tax liability, unless
the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the
corporation and made a determination that this further action
is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
Sec. 8111. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any
Federal law within the preceding 24 months, where the
awarding agency is aware of the conviction, unless the agency
has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and
made a determination that this further action is not
necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
Sec. 8112. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used in contravention of section 1590 or 1591 of title
18, United States Code, or in contravention of the
requirements of section 106(g) or (h) of the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7104(g) or (h)).
Sec. 8113. None of the funds made available by this Act
for International Military education and training, foreign
military financing, excess defense article, assistance under
section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 119 Stat. 3456),
issuance for direct commercial sales of military equipment,
or peacekeeping operations for the countries of Chad, Yemen,
Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and
Burma may be used to support any military training or
operation that include child soldiers, as defined by the
Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-457; 22
U.S.C. 2370c-1), and except if such assistance is otherwise
permitted under section 404 of the Child Soldiers Prevention
Act of 2008.
Sec. 8114. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used in contravention of the War Powers Resolution (50
U.S.C. 1541 et seq.).
Sec. 8115. The Secretary of the Air Force shall obligate
and expend funds previously appropriated for the procurement
of RQ-4B Global Hawk aircraft for the purposes for which such
funds were originally appropriated.
Sec. 8116. The total amount available in the Act for pay
for civilian personnel of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2014 shall be the amount otherwise appropriated
or made available by this Act for such pay reduced by
$437,000,000.
Sec. 8117. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used by the Department of Defense or any other Federal
agency to lease or purchase new light duty vehicles, for any
executive fleet, or for an agency's fleet inventory, except
in accordance with Presidential Memorandum-Federal Fleet
Performance, dated May 24, 2011.
Sec. 8118. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to enter into a contract with any person or other
entity listed in the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)/
System for Award Management (SAM) as having been convicted of
fraud against the Federal Government.
Sec. 8119. (a) Limitation.--None of the funds made
available by this Act for the Department of Defense may be
used for the purchase of any equipment from Rosoboronexport
until the Secretary of Defense certifies in writing to the
congressional defense committees that, to the best of the
Secretary's knowledge--
(1) Rosoboronexport is cooperating fully with the Defense
Contract Audit Agency;
(2) Rosoboronexport has not delivered S-300 advanced anti-
aircraft missiles to Syria; and
(3) no new contracts have been signed between the Bashar al
Assad regime in Syria and Rosoboronexport since January 1,
2013.
(b) National Security Waiver.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
limitation in subsection (a) if the Secretary certifies that
the waiver in order to purchase equipment from
Rosoboronexport is in national security interest of the
United States.
(2) Report.--If the Secretary waives the limitation in
subsection (a) pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall
submit to the congressional defense committees, not later
than 30 days before purchasing equipment from Rosoboronexport
pursuant to the waiver, a report on the waiver. The report
shall be submitted in classified or unclassified form, at the
election of the Secretary. The report shall include the
following:
(A) An explanation why it is in the national security
interest of the United States to purchase equipment from
Rosoboronexport.
(B) An explanation why comparable equipment cannot be
purchased from another corporation.
(C) An assessment of the cooperation of Rosoboronexport
with the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
(D) An assessment of whether and how many S-300 advanced
anti-aircraft missiles have been delivered to the Assad
regime by Rosoboronexport.
(E) A list of the contracts that Rosoboronexport has signed
with the Assad regime since January 1, 2013.
(c) Requirement for Competitively Bid Contracts.--The
Secretary of Defense shall award any contract that will use
United States funds for the procurement of helicopters for
the Afghan Security Forces using competitive procedures based
on requirements developed by the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 8120. Section 8159(c) of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2002 (division A of Public Law 107-117,
10 U.S.. 2401a note) is amended by striking paragraph (7).
Sec. 8121. None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used for the purchase or manufacture of a flag of the
United States unless such flags are treated as covered items
under section 2533a(b) of title 10, United States Code.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8122. In addition to amounts appropriated or
otherwise made available elsewhere in this Act, $25,000,000
is hereby appropriated to the Department of Defense and made
available for transfer to the Army, Air Force, Navy, and
Marine Corps, for purposes of implementation of a Sexual
Assault Special Victims Program: Provided, That funds
transferred under this provision are to be merged with and
available for the same purposes and time period as the
appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That
the transfer authority provided under this heading is in
addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere
in this Act.
Sec. 8123. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used in contravention of the amendments made to the
Uniform Code of Military Justice in subtitle D of title V of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014
regarding the discharge or dismissal of a member of the Armed
Forces convicted of certain sex-related offenses, the
required trial of such offenses by general courts-martial,
and the limitations imposed on convening authority discretion
regarding court-martial findings and sentence.
Sec. 8124. None of the funds appropriated in this, or any
other Act, may be obligated or expended by the United States
Government for the direct personal benefit of the President
of Afghanistan.
Sec. 8125. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to eliminate or reduce funding for a program,
project or activity as proposed in the President's budget
request for fiscal year 2015 until such proposed change is
subsequently enacted in an appropriation Act, or unless such
change is made pursuant to the reprogramming or transfer
provisions of this Act.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 8126. In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in
this Act for pay for military personnel, including Reserve
and National Guard personnel, $580,000,000 is hereby
appropriated to the Department of Defense and made available
for transfer only to military personnel accounts.
TITLE IX
OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENTS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'',
$6,703,006,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by
the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War
on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Military Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'',
$558,344,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by
the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War
on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $1,019,322,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
[[Page H4904]]
Military Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air
Force'', $867,087,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Reserve Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'',
$40,952,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Reserve Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'',
$20,238,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $15,134,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Air
Force'', $20,432,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
National Guard Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel,
Army'', $393,364,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel,
Air Force'', $6,919,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and Maintenance, Army
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'', $30,929,633,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
(including transfer of funds)
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'', $6,255,993,000, of which up to $227,033,000 may be
transferred to the Coast Guard ``Operating Expenses'' account
notwithstanding section 2215 of title 10, United States Code:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps'', $2,669,815,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force'', $10,605,224,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', $6,240,437,000: Provided, That of the funds
provided under this heading, not to exceed $1,500,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2015, shall be for
payments to reimburse key cooperating nations for logistical,
military, and other support, including access, provided to
United States military operations in support of Operation
Enduring Freedom, and post-operation Iraq border security
related to the activities of the Office of Security
Cooperation in Iraq, notwithstanding any other provision of
law: Provided further, That such reimbursement payments may
be made in such amounts as the Secretary of Defense, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State, and in consultation
with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, may
determine, in his discretion, based on documentation
determined by the Secretary of Defense to adequately account
for the support provided, and such determination is final and
conclusive upon the accounting officers of the United States,
and 15 days following notification to the appropriate
congressional committees: Provided further, That the
requirement under this heading to provide notification to the
appropriate congressional committees shall not apply with
respect to a reimbursement for access based on an
international agreement: Provided further, That these funds
may be used for the purpose of providing specialized training
and procuring supplies and specialized equipment and
providing such supplies and loaning such equipment on a non-
reimbursable basis to coalition forces supporting United
States military operations in Afghanistan, and 15 days
following notification to the appropriate congressional
committees: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall provide quarterly reports to the congressional defense
committees on the use of funds provided in this paragraph:
Provided further, That of the funds provided under this
heading, $35,000,000 shall be made available for support for
foreign forces participating in operations to counter the
Lord's Resistance Army efforts: Provided further, That such
amount in this section is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army Reserve'', $42,935,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy Reserve'', $55,700,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps Reserve'', $12,534,000: Provided, That such
amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force Reserve'', $32,849,000: Provided, That such amount
is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army National Guard'', $199,371,000: Provided, That such
amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air National Guard'', $22,200,000: Provided, That such amount
is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund
(including transfer of funds)
In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in this Act,
there is appropriated $1,073,800,000 for the ``Overseas
Contingency Operations Transfer Fund'' for expenses directly
relating to overseas contingency operations by United States
military forces, to be available until expended: Provided,
That of the funds made available in this section, the
Secretary of Defense may transfer these funds only to
military personnel accounts, operation and maintenance
accounts, procurement accounts, and working capital fund
accounts: Provided further, That the funds made available in
this paragraph may only be used for programs, projects, or
activities categorized as Overseas Contingency Operations in
the fiscal year 2014 budget request for the Department of
Defense and the justification material and other
documentation supporting such request: Provided further,
That the funds transferred shall be merged with and shall be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period,
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That the Secretary shall notify the congressional defense
committees 15 days prior to such transfer: Provided further,
That the transfer authority provided under this heading is in
addition to any other transfer authority available to the
Department of Defense: Provided further, That upon a
determination that all or part of the funds transferred from
this appropriation are not necessary for the purposes
provided herein, such amounts may be transferred back to this
appropriation and shall be available for the
[[Page H4905]]
same purposes and for the same time period as originally
appropriated: Provided further, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For the ``Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund'', $279,000,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That
such funds shall be available to the Secretary of Defense for
infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, which shall be undertaken by the
Secretary of State, unless the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Defense jointly decide that a specific project
will be undertaken by the Department of Defense: Provided
further, That the infrastructure referred to in the preceding
proviso is in support of the counterinsurgency strategy,
which may require funding for facility and infrastructure
projects, including, but not limited to, water, power, and
transportation projects and related maintenance and
sustainment costs: Provided further, That the authority to
undertake such infrastructure projects is in addition to any
other authority to provide assistance to foreign nations:
Provided further, That any projects funded under this heading
shall be jointly formulated and concurred in by the Secretary
of State and Secretary of Defense: Provided further, That
funds may be transferred to the Department of State for
purposes of undertaking projects, which funds shall be
considered to be economic assistance under the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of making available the
administrative authorities contained in that Act: Provided
further, That the transfer authority in the preceding proviso
is in addition to any other authority available to the
Department of Defense to transfer funds: Provided further,
That any unexpended funds transferred to the Secretary of
State under this authority shall be returned to the
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund if the Secretary of State, in
coordination with the Secretary of Defense, determines that
the project cannot be implemented for any reason, or that the
project no longer supports the counterinsurgency strategy in
Afghanistan: Provided further, That any funds returned to the
Secretary of Defense under the previous proviso shall be
available for use under this appropriation and shall be
treated in the same manner as funds not transferred to the
Secretary of State: Provided further, That contributions of
funds for the purposes provided herein to the Secretary of
State in accordance with section 635(d) of the Foreign
Assistance Act from any person, foreign government, or
international organization may be credited to this Fund, to
remain available until expended, and used for such purposes:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall, not
fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers to or from, or
obligations from the Fund, notify the appropriate committees
of Congress in writing of the details of any such transfer:
Provided further, That the ``appropriate committees of
Congress'' are the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign
Relations, and Appropriations of the Senate and the
Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and
Appropriations of the House of Representatives: Provided
further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For the ``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'',
$7,726,720,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015:
Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary
of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purpose of allowing the Commander, Combined Security
Transition Command--Afghanistan, or the Secretary's designee,
to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of State, to the security forces of Afghanistan, including
the provision of equipment, supplies, services, training,
facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and
construction, and funding: Provided further, That the
authority to provide assistance under this heading is in
addition to any other authority to provide assistance to
foreign nations: Provided further, That contributions of
funds for the purposes provided herein from any person,
foreign government, or international organization may be
credited to this Fund, to remain available until expended,
and used for such purposes: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense
committees in writing upon the receipt and upon the
obligation of any contribution, delineating the sources and
amounts of the funds received and the specific use of such
contributions: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to obligating
from this appropriation account, notify the congressional
defense committees in writing of the details of any such
obligations: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall notify the congressional defense committees of any
proposed new projects or transfer of funds between budget
sub-activity groups in excess of $20,000,000: Provided
further, That the United States may accept equipment procured
using funds provided under this heading in this or prior Acts
that was transferred to the security forces of Afghanistan
and returned by such forces to the United States: Provided
further, That the equipment described in the previous
proviso, as well as equipment not yet transferred to the
security forces of Afghanistan when determined by the
Commander, Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan,
or the Secretary's designee, to no longer be required for
transfer to such forces, may be treated as stocks of the
Department of Defense upon written notification to the
congressional defense committees: Provided further, That of
the funds provided under this heading, not less than
$47,300,000 shall be for recruitment and retention of women
in the Afghanistan National Security Forces: Provided
further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Army'', $771,788,000, to remain available until September 30,
2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Missile Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Army'',
$154,532,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and
Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $15,422,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such
amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Army'', $190,382,000, to remain available until September 30,
2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Other Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'',
$909,825,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Navy'', $240,696,000, to remain available until September 30,
2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Weapons Procurement, Navy'',
$86,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Navy and Marine Corps'', $169,362,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Other Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'',
$17,968,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Procurement, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'',
$125,984,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force'', $188,868,000, to remain available until September
30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to
[[Page H4906]]
section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Air
Force'', $24,200,000, to remain available until September 30,
2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Air Force'', $137,826,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated
by the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global
War on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Other Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air
Force'', $2,524,846,000, to remain available until September
30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'',
$128,947,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
For procurement of aircraft, missiles, tracked combat
vehicles, ammunition, other weapons and other procurement for
the reserve components of the Armed Forces, $1,500,000,000,
to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That the Chiefs of National Guard and Reserve
components shall, not later than 30 days after the enactment
of this Act, individually submit to the congressional defense
committees the modernization priority assessment for their
respective National Guard or Reserve component: Provided
further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Army'', $7,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is designated
by the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global
War on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Navy'', $34,426,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Air Force'', $9,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $66,208,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such
amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS
Defense Working Capital Funds
For an additional amount for ``Defense Working Capital
Funds'', $264,910,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Defense Health Program
For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'',
$904,201,000, which shall be for operation and maintenance:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for
Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism
pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
For an additional amount for ``Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', $376,305,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such
amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For the ``Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund'',
$1,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016:
Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary
of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purpose of allowing the Director of the Joint Improvised
Explosive Device Defeat Organization to investigate, develop
and provide equipment, supplies, services, training,
facilities, personnel and funds to assist United States
forces in the defeat of improvised explosive devices:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer
funds provided herein to appropriations for military
personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; research,
development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital
funds to accomplish the purpose provided herein: Provided
further, That this transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers from
this appropriation, notify the congressional defense
committees in writing of the details of any such transfer:
Provided further, That such amount is designated by the
Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on
Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Office of the Inspector General
For an additional amount for the ``Office of the Inspector
General'', $10,766,000: Provided, That such amount is
designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS TITLE
Sec. 9001. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds made available in this title are in addition to amounts
appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department
of Defense for fiscal year 2014.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 9002. Upon the determination of the Secretary of
Defense that such action is necessary in the national
interest, the Secretary may, with the approval of the Office
of Management and Budget, transfer up to $4,000,000,000
between the appropriations or funds made available to the
Department of Defense in this title: Provided, That the
Secretary shall notify the Congress promptly of each transfer
made pursuant to the authority in this section: Provided
further, That the authority provided in this section is in
addition to any other transfer authority available to the
Department of Defense and is subject to the same terms and
conditions as the authority provided in the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2014.
Sec. 9003. Supervision and administration costs and costs
for design during construction associated with a construction
project funded with appropriations available for operation
and maintenance, ``Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund'', or the
``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'' provided in this Act and
executed in direct support of overseas contingency operations
in Afghanistan, may be obligated at the time a construction
contract is awarded: Provided, That for the purpose of this
section, supervision and administration costs and costs for
design during construction include all in-house Government
costs.
Sec. 9004. From funds made available in this title, the
Secretary of Defense may purchase for use by military and
civilian employees of the Department of Defense in the U.S.
Central Command area of responsibility: (a) passenger motor
vehicles up to a limit of $75,000 per vehicle; and (b) heavy
and light armored vehicles for the physical security of
personnel or for force protection purposes up to a limit of
$250,000 per vehicle, notwithstanding price or other
limitations applicable to the purchase of passenger carrying
vehicles.
Sec. 9005. Not to exceed $60,000,000 of the amount
appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Army'' may be used, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, to fund the Commander's Emergency Response
Program (CERP), for the purpose of enabling military
commanders in Afghanistan to respond to urgent, small-scale,
humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements within
their areas of responsibility: Provided, That each project
(including any ancillary or related elements in connection
with such project) executed under this authority shall not
exceed $20,000,000: Provided further, That not later than 45
days after the end of each fiscal year quarter, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report regarding the source of funds and the
allocation and use of funds during
[[Page H4907]]
that quarter that were made available pursuant to the
authority provided in this section or under any other
provision of law for the purposes described herein: Provided
further, That, not later than 30 days after the end of each
month, the Army shall submit to the congressional defense
committees monthly commitment, obligation, and expenditure
data for the Commander's Emergency Response Program in
Afghanistan: Provided further, That not less than 15 days
before making funds available pursuant to the authority
provided in this section or under any other provision of law
for the purposes described herein for a project with a total
anticipated cost for completion of $5,000,000 or more, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a written notice containing each of the following:
(1) The location, nature and purpose of the proposed
project, including how the project is intended to advance the
military campaign plan for the country in which it is to be
carried out.
(2) The budget, implementation timeline with milestones,
and completion date for the proposed project, including any
other CERP funding that has been or is anticipated to be
contributed to the completion of the project.
(3) A plan for the sustainment of the proposed project,
including the agreement with either the host nation, a non-
Department of Defense agency of the United States Government
or a third-party contributor to finance the sustainment of
the activities and maintenance of any equipment or facilities
to be provided through the proposed project.
Sec. 9006. Funds available to the Department of Defense
for operation and maintenance may be used, notwithstanding
any other provision of law, to provide supplies, services,
transportation, including airlift and sealift, and other
logistical support to coalition forces supporting military
and stability operations in Afghanistan: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense shall provide quarterly reports to the
congressional defense committees regarding support provided
under this section.
Sec. 9007. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this or any other Act shall be obligated or
expended by the United States Government for a purpose as
follows:
(1) To establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Iraq.
(2) To exercise United States control over any oil resource
of Iraq.
(3) To establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Afghanistan.
Sec. 9008. None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or
regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (done at New York on
December 10, 1984):
(1) Section 2340A of title 18, United States Code.
(2) Section 2242 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998 (division G of Public Law 105-277;
112 Stat. 2681-822; 8 U.S.C. 1231 note) and regulations
prescribed thereto, including regulations under part 208 of
title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, and part 95 of title
22, Code of Federal Regulations.
(3) Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Department of Defense,
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes
in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-148).
Sec. 9009. None of the funds provided for the
``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'' (ASFF) may be obligated
prior to the approval of a financial and activity plan by the
Afghanistan Resources Oversight Council (AROC) of the
Department of Defense: Provided, That the AROC must approve
the requirement and acquisition plan for any service
requirements in excess of $50,000,000 annually and any non-
standard equipment requirements in excess of $100,000,000
using ASFF: Provided further, That the AROC must approve all
projects and the execution plan under the ``Afghanistan
Infrastructure Fund'' (AIF) and any project in excess of
$5,000,000 from the Commanders Emergency Response Program
(CERP): Provided further, That the Department of Defense must
certify to the congressional defense committees that the AROC
has convened and approved a process for ensuring compliance
with the requirements in the preceding provisos and
accompanying report language for the ASFF, AIF, and CERP.
Sec. 9010. Funds made available in this title to the
Department of Defense for operation and maintenance may be
used to purchase items having an investment unit cost of not
more than $250,000: Provided, That, upon determination by the
Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary to meet
the operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant
Command engaged in contingency operations overseas, such
funds may be used to purchase items having an investment item
unit cost of not more than $500,000.
Sec. 9011. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, up
to $63,800,000 of funds made available in this title under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' may be
obligated and expended for purposes of the Task Force for
Business and Stability Operations, subject to the direction
and control of the Secretary of Defense, with concurrence of
the Secretary of State, to carry out strategic business and
economic assistance activities in Afghanistan in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom: Provided, That not less than 15
days before making funds available pursuant to the authority
provided in this section for any project with a total
anticipated cost of $5,000,000 or more, the Secretary shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a written
notice containing a detailed justification and timeline for
each proposed project.
Sec. 9012. From funds made available to the Department of
Defense by this Act under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Air Force'' up to $209,000,000 may be used by
the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, to support United States Government transition
activities in Iraq by funding the operations and activities
of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq and security
assistance teams, including life support, transportation and
personal security, and facilities renovation and
construction, and site closeout activities prior to returning
sites to the Government of Iraq: Provided, That to the extent
authorized under the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014, the operations and activities that may be
carried out by the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq
may, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, include
non-operational training activities in support of Iraqi
Ministry of Defense and Counter Terrorism Service personnel
in an institutional environment to address capability gaps,
integrate processes relating to intelligence, air
sovereignty, combined arms, logistics and maintenance, and to
manage and integrate defense-related institutions: Provided
further, That not later than 30 days following the enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
State shall submit to the congressional defense committees a
plan for transitioning any such training activities that they
determine are needed after the end of fiscal year 2013, to
existing or new contracts for the sale of defense articles or
defense services consistent with the provisions of the Arms
Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.): Provided
further, That not less than 15 days before making funds
available pursuant to the authority provided in this section,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a written notification containing a
detailed justification and timeline for the operations and
activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq at
each site where such operations and activities will be
conducted during fiscal year 2013.
(rescissions)
Sec. 9013.
Of the funds appropriated in Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby rescinded
from the following account in the specified amount: Provided,
That such amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas
Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to
section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985:
``General Provisions, 2009/XXXX'', $46,022,000.
Sec. 9014. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act under the heading ``Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' for payments under section 1233
of Public Law 110-181 for reimbursement to the Government of
Pakistan may be made available unless the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State,
certifies to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of Pakistan is--
(1) cooperating with the United States in counterterrorism
efforts against the Haqqani Network, the Quetta Shura
Taliban, Lashkar e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Al Qaeda, and
other domestic and foreign terrorist organizations, including
taking steps to end support for such groups and prevent them
from basing and operating in Pakistan and carrying out cross
border attacks into neighboring countries;
(2) not supporting terrorist activities against United
States or coalition forces in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's
military and intelligence agencies are not intervening extra-
judicially into political and judicial processes in Pakistan;
(3) dismantling improvised explosive device (IED) networks
and interdicting precursor chemicals used in the manufacture
of IEDs;
(4) preventing the proliferation of nuclear-related
material and expertise;
(5) implementing policies to protect judicial independence
and due process of law;
(6) issuing visas in a timely manner for United States
visitors engaged in counterterrorism efforts and assistance
programs in Pakistan; and
(7) providing humanitarian organizations access to
detainees, internally displaced persons, and other Pakistani
civilians affected by the conflict.
(b) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of State, may waive the restriction in paragraph
(a) on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate that it is in the national security interest
to do so: Provided, That if the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of State, exercises the
authority of the previous proviso, the Secretaries shall
report to the Committees on Appropriations on both the
justification for the waiver and on the requirements of this
section that the Government of Pakistan was not able to meet:
Provided further,
[[Page H4908]]
That such report may be submitted in classified form if
necessary.
TITLE X--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
spending reduction account
Sec. 10001. The amount by which the applicable allocation
of new budget authority made by the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives under section
302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the
amount of proposed new budget authority is $0.
The CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those
printed in House Report 113-170, the amendment described in section 2
of House Resolution 312, and amendments en bloc described in section 3
of that resolution.
Each amendment printed in House Report 113-170 may be offered only in
the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be
debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the
proponent at any time before action thereon, shall not be subject to
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
After disposition of amendments printed in House Report 113-170 and
amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 312, it
shall be in order for the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or
his designee to offer an amendment reducing funding levels in the bill.
It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on
Appropriations or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting
of amendments printed in House Report 113-170 not earlier disposed of.
Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for
20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective
designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject
to a demand for division of the question. The original proponent of an
amendment included in such amendments en bloc may insert a statement in
the Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of the
amendments en bloc.
After the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment,
there shall be in order a final period of general debate, which shall
not exceed 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Walberg
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Mr. WALBERG. I have an amendment at the desk, Madam Chairman.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 8, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $11,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
{time} 1500
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chairman, in light of recent events in Benghazi
and North Africa, the Pentagon approved the development of the Special
Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force for Crisis Response to function
under United States African Command. This task force is specifically
tailored for crisis response in Africa, and in April deployed to Spain
and Italy.
The unit is capable of responding to a wide range of military
operations and will provide limited defense crisis response in support
of embassies, support non-combatant evacuation operations, provide
humanitarian assistance, and assist with disaster relief operations,
search and rescue, and other missions as directed.
As this force is ramping up, I believe we need to ensure that this
valid and important mission is completely and adequately funded.
With the rise of Islamic militant groups in Mali, Nigeria and
Somalia, and continued unrest in Egypt, Libya and Algeria, the threat
is real and growing.
The committee has added funds for sustainment and follow-up
deployments in fiscal year 2014, but there are substantial concerns
that the need may be higher. Funding for this force was not requested
in the President's budget, but was included in the House-passed NDAA.
I'm hopeful that in establishing a funding source and signaling
congressional willingness to support this mission, the Marine Corps
will be better able to assess their needs and provide us with a more
exact funding request.
To work towards a sure state of readiness, I'm offering this budget-
neutral amendment to increase this funding by $10 million while
reducing funding to the Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account
by $11 million. During consideration of the NDAA last month, an
amendment was adopted by voice vote that would increase authorization
for the crisis response force by a similar amount.
To provide an additional military response in case of another
Benghazi-type situation, we must ensure that the special purpose Marine
Air-Ground Task Force, Crisis Response can properly respond to threats
to our diplomatic posts in an expeditious manner.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, I claim the time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, for the reasons that the
gentleman has already outlined, the committee had already added $30
million for the special purpose MAGTF, Crisis Response teams, as well
as an additional $35 million for the new Marine Corps Embassy Security
program.
The gentleman is exactly right that we're not doing enough on this
issue, and we are certainly in support of his amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Delaney
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $25,000,000)''.
Page 86, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $16,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Delaney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chairman, my amendment responds to a common
dilemma facing our military families, a dilemma that is deeply
unfortunate, but easily solvable.
When our warfighters and veterans head to the hospital, their
families often face a choice between being there or paying their bills.
This means that too often our military heroes are in the hospital alone
without the support of their family. They deserve better.
This amendment will increase funding for Fisher Houses, which
provides free housing for the families of patients receiving care at
military and VA hospitals. This additional funding is offset by a
corresponding reduction to the defense-wide operation and maintenance
account.
Thanks to Fisher Houses, when our heroes are in the hospital, their
families have a place to stay. Thanks to Fisher Houses, when our
military families need our support, we lend them a helping hand, a home
away from home.
This program is not only compassionate, but it's cost effective.
Since 1990, over 180,000 families have been served by Fisher Houses,
saving military families over $200 million. However, you can't put a
price tag on the emotional, psychological, and spiritual value these
homes provide.
After 2 years, we have seen resources strained and backlogs develop.
We can't expect better results without improving our support structure.
This amendment would lead to the construction of at least four new
Fisher Houses next year. Four new homes means lodging for 2,000
military family members. That's 2,000 sons, daughters, wives, husbands,
brothers, and sisters that
[[Page H4909]]
can be by the side of our military heroes during their most significant
time of need.
No veteran, no servicemember should head to the hospital alone. I
encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the Fisher Houses program is a
real success story. It was initially started by Mr. Zach Fisher. After
his death, the family continued.
The need was so great at the military hospitals; but also at the VA
hospitals, there were no Fisher Houses. So the program was expanded,
and we increased our involvement. The Congress had not been involved up
to this point. The Congress appropriated money, and we've been
appropriating $4 million a year to add to the Fisher House Foundation
for the purpose of the Fisher Houses. We also allow for $11 million for
transfers to the Fisher House operations.
I say, again, it's a real success story; and while it's additional
money, we're happy to support the gentleman's amendment and make sure
that the Fisher Houses continue.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
I do not rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment, but to cast a
caution over the expenditure of the proposed funds. The bill contains
$4 million, and this is a phenomenal program. I am not in any way
suggesting otherwise.
But the gentleman's amendment is quadrupling funding in 1 year for
this project from $4 million to $20 million. So I would hope that the
people that are running this program understand that in a time of great
fiscal constraint, they better very carefully, effectively, and wisely
spend this additional money that I'm not objecting to, but I am very
concerned about quadrupling $4 million that is already in a bill for a
very good program.
I appreciate the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Reclaiming my time, I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. DELANEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms.
Titus).
Ms. TITUS. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Delaney
amendment.
As a member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I understand
the important role that Fisher Houses play in supporting members of our
armed services, our Nation's veterans, and their families.
In southern Nevada, a brand new VA hospital opened recently to serve
the 154,000 veterans who live in our area. Just north of the hospital,
there is land that has already been dedicated to a brand new Fisher
House. I support this amendment because it will allow Fisher House
Foundation to build an extra four houses this year, including the one
in Las Vegas, helping an extra 2,000 families.
The Fisher House Foundation received an A-plus rating from the
American Institute of Philanthropy, so we know that our money is being
used efficiently and effectively to make a meaningful difference in the
lives of our heroes and their families.
I look forward to a day when members of the armed services and our
veterans will all have their families close to them as they receive
medical care at these facilities, including the new hospital in Las
Vegas.
Mr. DELANEY. I appreciate the comments of my colleagues and the
support of my colleagues.
As I have no other comments, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Delaney).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Gabbard
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $104,000,000)''.
Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $104,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from
Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Hawaii.
Ms. GABBARD. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
The U.S. Navy has acknowledged a growing problem that threatens its
dominance at sea. It's strike reach is shrinking and aging, while
potential enemies' attack reach is growing and modernizing. We
recognize this most specifically within the Asia-Pacific region. It's
because of this growing recognition that the Navy is exploring new
weapons in order to successfully execute our strategic rebalance of
military assets to the Asia-Pacific region.
A longstanding Navy urgent operational needs statement and related
intelligence estimates detail a troubling capability and readiness gap
that have compelled the Secretary of Defense to direct accelerated
development of an over-the-horizon surface warfare missile that can be
launched from aircraft or surface vessels and strike well-defended
moving maritime targets.
Currently, surface-launched anti-ship missiles face the growing
challenge of penetrating sophisticated enemy air defense systems from
long range and present the potential for large no-go zones, which deny
the Navy access in key conflict areas.
The military expects our adversaries will continue their development
of increasingly sophisticated anti-access area denial capabilities that
are able to jam or destroy GPS systems which guide our missiles. This
clearly highlights the need for the offensive anti-surface warfare
weapon, as well as the long-range anti-ship missile, which has a
requirement of independently detecting and validating the target that
it was shot at.
In authorizing the full request in the President's budget, the House
Armed Services Committee noted the need for a new generation of anti-
ship weapons capable of penetrating sophisticated enemy air defense
systems from long range and said such a capability is even more
relevant today and is critical to meeting national security objectives
and rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. By providing these new
capabilities, we allow our Navy to safely engage and destroy high-value
targets well beyond the potential counterfire range of the adversaries
that they may face.
I recently received a letter from Admiral Locklear, commander of the
U.S. Pacific Command, who's at the forefront of this rebalance to the
Asia-Pacific region, noting the importance of these two weapons. He
expressed deep concern about the reductions proposed by the Defense
Appropriation Subcommittee and said that such reductions will derail
the efforts of Pacific Command to outpace an expanding threat,
increasingly degrade our regional response options, and potentially
erode regional confidence in our commitment to the rebalance. We can
and must do all that we can to correct the significant strategic and
operational risks that these budget cuts present at this critical
juncture.
I urge you to support the President's budget request, as well as the
authorization that the House Armed Services Committee approved, in
order to keep this essential element of our Asia-Pacific rebalance on
track for fielding.
I look forward to working with my colleagues and ask for their
support as I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, I would like a clarification
on the time issues.
Since the time is structured, is it possible for the person offering
the amendment to reserve that time when they have completed their
statement?
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman may reserve.
{time} 1515
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, very simply, most of this
[[Page H4910]]
money would be taken from the Special Operations Command funding. It's
not a good idea. We're using the Special Operators more and more, all
the time. We are finding them involved in places where you might be
surprised, and I just don't think it is wise for us to be taking this
funding from Special Operations. Special Operations are the Navy SEALs
and the Special teams that go into difficult places. We prefer not to
put limitations that this amendment would cause.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to Mr. Visclosky.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. My understanding as well during subcommittee
consideration is that the new START proposed--and this is a new START
proposed for 2014--provide very little explanation or rationale, and
that's from the Department of Defense. The committee recommendation was
for a reduction because of the poor justification by the Department
itself. I think I am correct in my understanding.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the gentleman for his comment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, a couple of points I would like to clarify.
This amendment proposes that the offset come from the O&M Defense-wide
account, but makes up less than one-half of 1 percent of the entire
amount requested in funding for that.
With regards to the justification for the timing of this issue, the
letter from Admiral Locklear--the contents of that letter recognize the
effectiveness and the necessity of these programs, and are looking
really to bypass normal acquisition processes due to the urgent need
that they have identified there within the region, which is why I am
strongly asking my colleagues to consider supporting this amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Commander,
U.S. Pacific Command,
Camp H.M. Smith, HI, July 18, 2013.
Hon. Richard Durbin,
Chairman, Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: As you know, U.S. Pacific Command
(USPACOM) is at the forefront of executing key aspects of our
strategic rebalance to the Asia-Pacific. The complexity of
the operational environment and the pace of emerging
potential threats in this theater demand a responsive and
credible joint force to reassure our friends, dissuade
adversaries, and defend our national interests. To that end,
I want to ensure you are aware that proposed reductions in
the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 budget for Offensive Anti-Surface
Warfare (OASuW) capability (PE 0604786N) introduces
significant strategic and operational risk at a time-critical
juncture in our rebalance.
Specifically, my FY 2015-2019 Integrated Priority List
(IPL), a long-standing Navy OASuW Urgent Operational Needs
Statement, and related intelligence estimates detail a
particularly troubling capability and readiness gap that
compelled the Deputy Secretary of Defense to direct
accelerated (2018) fielding of the Long Range Anti-Ship
Missile (LRASM). If enacted, the reductions proposed in the
FY 2014 budget for OASuW/LRASM will derail our efforts to
outpace an expanding threat, increasingly constrain our
regional response options, and potentially erode regional
confidence in our commitment to the rebalance.
I urge you to support the President's Budget request and
reconsider the proposed OASuW/LRASM reductions in order to
keep this vital program on track for FY 2018 fielding. Thank
you for your continued support of USPACOM and this essential
element of our Asia-Pacific rebalance.
Sincerely,
S.J. Locklear, III.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Hawaii will be postponed.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Grayson
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Grayson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Chair, this amendment would increase the Defense
health program account by $10 million in order to fund a cure for Gulf
War illness. Currently, there is no cure for Gulf War illness, and it
affects over a third of the veterans who served in the first Gulf War.
This amendment is identical to an amendment offered last year that
passed this body by a voice vote, and according to the Congressional
Budget Office, this amendment actually will reduce total outlays by $1
million.
Veterans of the first Gulf War suffer from persistent symptoms,
including chronic headaches, widespread pain, cognitive difficulties,
debilitating fatigue, gastrointestinal problems, respiratory symptoms,
and other abnormalities that are not explained by traditional medicine
or psychiatric diagnoses.
Research shows that as veterans from the first Gulf War age, they are
twice as likely to develop Lou Gehrig's disease as their nondeployed
peers. There also may be connections to multiple sclerosis and
Parkinson's disease. Sadly, there are no known treatments for the
lifelong pain and affliction that these veterans must endure through
this disease.
For decades, the Veterans Administration has downplayed any
neurological basis for this disease, but recent research just this year
has shown unequivocally that this disease is biological in nature. The
time has come to right the wrong that our servicemen and -women have
had to live with for over 20 years.
In this Department of Defense appropriations bill, we allocate more
money for breast cancer, orthopedic, and prostate cancer research than
we do for finding a cure for Gulf War illness. Equivalent funds are
appropriated for ovarian cancer research.
Personally, I think if we are going to spend money on medical
research within the Department of Defense, the Department must
adequately fund research on those diseases that originate in war and
wholly affect our servicemen and -women. Over a quarter of a million
veterans display symptoms of this disease, and the time has come to
find and fund a cure for it.
The offset for my amendment today comes from the $32 million
Operation and Maintenance Defense-wide account, and that account is
funded $500 million above the amount in last year's DOD appropriations
bill.
Congress has responsibility to ensure that the Gulf War veterans, who
put it all on the line and are paying for that with a lifetime of pain,
are not left behind.
I urge my colleagues, including my esteemed colleague from Florida,
to support this amendment and help to find a cure for Gulf War illness.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, although we're going to support
this amendment from my colleague from Florida, I take this time to
point out that we've already included an additional $20 million for the
program, the same amount that was included in fiscal year 2013. Prior
to 2013, the subcommittee typically included $8 million to $10 million
annually for this program. But this bill, this year for 2014, has an
additional $20 million, but it is a serious issue, and it is one that
we can't take lightly, and so we do support the gentleman's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAYSON. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for
accelerating the efforts to find a cure for this disease. I am very
grateful to him, and so are thousands of veterans.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Israel
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in
House Report 113-170.
[[Page H4911]]
Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Israel) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I will be very brief. This is a bipartisan
amendment offered by my colleague from New York, the gentleman from the
Second Congressional District, Congressman Peter King, and myself, to
transfer $10 million to mental health programs within the Department of
Defense. It is fully offset.
Madam Chair, 22 veterans every day are committing suicide; 273,000
veterans have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injury since 2000;
and the pace of post-traumatic stress disorder is going to require new
thinking, new innovations, new technologies, new partnerships, and
collaborations. That's exactly what this bipartisan amendment crafted
by Congressman King and myself does.
This amendment creates new public-private partnerships between the
Department of Defense and teaching hospitals and research institutions
for the research, the treatment, and outreach on military mental health
matters. This is not a matter of partisanship, this is a matter of
doing the right thing for our veterans. It was my honor to work
together on a bipartisan basis with the gentleman from New York (Mr.
King), and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, actually, this amendment moves
money around within the Defense health program for something the
committee has worked a long and hard time over the years dealing with:
the subject of traumatic brain injury and psychological health
research. In fact, we included an additional $125 million in the bill
above the President's request because of the importance of the issue
that we're facing. We are seeing more and more cases of TBI, traumatic
brain injuries, than we had expected, I believe. So we added the
additional money that the gentleman's amendment would move around in
the DHP, so we have absolutely no problem with this amendment.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from
Indiana.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman's remarks, and I also
appreciate having the time to associate myself with the remarks you
have made on behalf of the gentleman's amendment.
Secondly, I note, as you point out, the subcommittee itself has done
significant work and recognizes the problems that we face in the
commitment we need to make to the individuals that the gentleman is
trying to help with his amendment. So again, I very much appreciate the
gentleman's remarks, as well as support for the issue in this
particular amendment.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I would just close by thanking the gentleman
from Florida, the chair, and the ranking member for their cooperation.
This amendment is so vitally important to those who are fighting for
our freedom.
In this amendment, we defend the defenders and we protect the
protectors, and I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for
their support for this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Israel).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Young of Florida
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution
312, I offer amendments en bloc.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 6, 32, 76, 77,
78, 79, 80, 81, and 82 printed in House Report 113-170, offered by Mr.
Young of Florida:
amendment no. 6 offered by mr. kilmer
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 23, 2013, on page H4911, the following appeared: AMENDMENT
NO. 6 OFFERED BY MR. YOUNG OF FLORIDA Page 9, line 6, after the
dollar amount, insert
The online version should be corrected to read: AMENDMENT NO. 6
OFFERED BY MR. KILMER Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount,
insert
========================= END NOTE =========================
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.
amendment no. 32 offered by Ms. Esty of connecticut
Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $38,000,000)''.
Page 143, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 76 offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 77 offered by mr. bridenstine of oklahoma
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $11,000,000)''.
Page 12, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
Page 13, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
amendment no. 78 offered by mr. mckinley of west virginia
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 79 offered by ms. bass of california
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,000,000) (increased by $3,000,000)''.
amendment no. 80 offered by ms. velazquez of new york
Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $19,000,000)''.
Page 143, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
amendment no. 81 offered by mr. grayson of florida
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 82 offered by ms. esty of connecticut
Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $27,500,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) each
will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the en bloc amendment has been
agreed to by the minority and the majority. They are noncontroversial
amendments that cover topics such as suicide prevention, traumatic
brain injury, and National Guard issues. The sponsors of the amendments
have agreed to the amendments being considered en bloc, and I would ask
for the adoption of this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1530
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
Mr. KILMER. Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Within this en bloc includes an amendment that highlights a very
troubling breakdown within the Department of Defense, how they collect
and process their personnel data.
Our brave men and women who are deployed overseas rely on the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to give them assurance that they won't
need to worry about a foreclosure on their house, a lease being
terminated, or outstanding credit card debt. We ask significant
sacrifices from our troops, and this is a needed helping hand at a time
when they are rightfully focused on serving their Nation.
In order to provide these protections, financial institutions are
required by law to consult the Department of Defense's data system to
validate servicemembers' deployment. This system is called the Defense
Manpower Data Center, or DMDC.
I've heard from a number of stakeholders that the DMDC is riddled
with inaccuracies because each service feeds their own data into the
database, with no standardization between services, and much of it was
originally entered by hand, with little-to-no quality assurance.
Obviously this creates a significant problem. We need our financial
institutions to have accurate data so that troops can get the benefits
provided by law.
[[Page H4912]]
I'm extremely concerned about the reliability of this data for the
purposes of SCRA compliance and, for that matter, any other personnel
process affected by the DOD. Going forward, I hope we can work together
to address this serious data problem within the DOD.
My amendment would cut $1 million to the Defense Human Resources
Activity Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account, and reinsert
that funding into the exact same place, with the intent of encouraging
a study on how the Defense Human Resources Activity components and the
CIO identify, catalog, process, communicate and rectify mistakes or
inconsistencies found when data is uploaded to the DMDC.
I want to thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Visclosky for
working with me on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Bass).
Ms. BASS. Madam Chair, this amendment considered en bloc would
provide the Department of Defense the flexibility to train and equip
wildlife reserve rangers to help combat illicit poaching across the
African continent. Poaching and wildlife trafficking are not only a
matter of conservation but a matter of international security.
As the ranking member of the Africa Subcommittee, I'm deeply troubled
by the damaging impact poaching has on the economic stability of
African nations. During my travels, African heads of state and
ambassadors have expressed that poaching erodes the tourism industry,
public safety, and regional security.
Various newspapers have reported that poaching and wildlife
traffickers are more dangerous and militarized than ever before, with
armed militias like Kony's Lord's Resistance Army and al Qaeda
affiliates fueling conflicts with the profits from poached ivory and
other animal products.
The Department of Defense can play a leading role in helping to
provide the training required to protect wildlife and put an end to
regional conflicts and instability fueled by poaching. Training in
reconnaissance, apprehension, and effective field communication will
better prepare park rangers.
I look forward to working with the chairman and ranking member.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, it does not appear that we have any other
speakers on our side, so I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Chair, today I rise in support for amendment #127
offered by Congressman Jim Bridenstine of Oklahoma; Congressman Joe
Wilson of South Carolina and myself to H.R. 2397, the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014. Our amendment would
provide an additional $10 million to the National Guard State
Partnership Program. It would be offset by a reduction of $11 million
to the Defense Media Activity in the Defense-wide operations and
maintenance account.
The amendment builds on the progress made in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 that strengthened and expanded
the National Guard State Partnership Program. The National Guard
provides unique capacity building capabilities to Combatant Commanders
and U.S. Ambassadors via 65 comprehensive partnerships between National
Guard units across the United States and partner nations. The State
Partnership Program directly supports the broad national interests and
security cooperation goals of the United States by engaging partner
nations via military, socio-political, and economic conduits at the
local; state, and national levels and these additional funds will
further strengthen existing relationships as well as foster new
partnerships. In particular, as we rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region
the State Partnership Program offers a very visible and tangible
component of that rebalance that meets both our military and diplomatic
objectives in the region.
Several Combatant Commanders have testified before Congress about the
importance of the State Partnership Program to meeting their strategic
objectives. The program has developed from assistance and partnership
with primarily Eastern European nations to a program that supports all
the non-CONUS combatant commanders. Again, I believe the SPP brings
unique capabilities to U.S. Pacific Command in expanding and
strengthening bilateral relations with many Asian and Pacific nations.
The program can help to demonstrate the U.S. commitment to the region
and our allies.
The amendment provides critical resources to this cost effective and
beneficial program. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
The CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 7 will not be
offered.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Langevin
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $22,000,000)''.
Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(increased by $22,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from Rhode
Island (Mr. Langevin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, before I begin, I want to first
congratulate the chairman, the gentleman from Florida, and the ranking
member for their important work on this legislation before us today.
Madam Chair, it's no surprise to any of us that the United States
Navy, with its critical role in our national defense, faces ever-
increasing global threats and a significant resource-constrained
environment. To maintain undersea dominance in maritime regions of
economic and military importance to the United States, the Navy
requires disruptive technologies that can be rapidly developed,
demonstrated, evaluated, and fielded to counter other nations'
expanding undersea capabilities, and to extend the Navy's reach and
persistence.
The Advanced Submarine Systems Development program supports
innovative and promising undersea technologies, including Unmanned
Undersea Vehicles, or UUVs, as we know them, for the delivery of new
and needed capability to the undersea domain.
However, under the current acquisition plan, the Navy may not have
the new technologies it needs to meet requirements in this domain until
after 2020. So my amendment reduces the appropriation for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, Office of Secretary of Defense by $22
million and transfers this amendment to RDT&E, Navy, for the purpose of
supporting Advanced Submarine Systems Development.
This represents a funding increase to the level authorized by the
Armed Services Committee and this House in the Fiscal Year 2014
National Defense Authorization Act. It has been scored as reducing
outlays by $3 million by CBO.
Unmanned systems, such as the Predator in the Air Force, provide
increased performance for many missions and have truly revolutionized
modern warfare. Autonomous undersea vehicles can add significant
capabilities to the Navy's systems and platforms and act as a force
multiplier for long-endurance, hazardous, or high-threat missions where
humans are limited in mission success.
In response to a question I asked at a hearing earlier this year
before the Armed Services Committee, Navy Secretary Lehman stated that,
and I quote:
These underwater systems, UUVs and USVs, can be relatively
more useful in undersea warfare than their airborne
counterparts are to surface and air forces.
While the Navy recognizes the promise of these
technologies, at a time of shrinking budgets, new
technologies, without existing bureaucratic and industry
supporters, tend to suffer disproportionate cuts and
cancellations, compared to programs with political and
bureaucratic constituencies and must be actively protected by
Congress.
So with this, Madam Chair, support of this program will help
accelerate the integration of UUVs and other autonomous undersea
technologies and payloads into the Navy for the full spectrum of
military needs and potentially
[[Page H4913]]
speed the eventual availability of these capabilities to civilian
purposes such as energy exploration and environmental monitoring, just
as happened with aerial vehicles.
My amendment accomplishes this in a fully competitive way
accelerating, rather than disrupting, the existing development process
and enabling earlier support of COCOM-defined operational needs.
With that, I urge support of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, as much as I want to support my
friend's amendment, I can't, so I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the money that he would use for
a large part comes from the Special Operations Command, and I just
don't think that we can restrict them, like some of the amendments that
we're seeing, in their ability to move about the world as they have to
move about the world and do the exciting things that they do.
But the gentleman's amendment adds $22 million to the $32 million
that we already included for this program. Now, that is a 63 percent
spike in funding for fiscal year 2014. That makes it very difficult for
the program managers or anybody involved with the program.
To assume a 63 percent increase means there may be a lot of new jobs
this year, but then the next year they'd all be fired and laid off
because the money is not there. This is not a consistent program,
except for the $32 million that we have included in this bill.
And so as much as I would like to support his bill, his amendment, I
really can't. I just don't think the program managers can handle a 63
percent increase in this or, frankly, any program.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I appreciate the comments that the
chairman has just made. I'd just point out that in the Defense
authorization bill this was authorized at the higher level. And the
information I have from program managers is that they could, in fact,
absorb and make important use of these funds in speeding these
technologies to the warfighter and enhancing our undersea capabilities.
With that, I would urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 13, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $500,000)''.
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $500,000)''.
Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $500,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm hoping to convince my colleagues
that, albeit what numbers you may have in this increasing and emerging
epidemic of post-traumatic stress disorder, let me give a personal
story that comes by way of my interaction often with veterans and,
particularly, a post-traumatic stress disorder center that we were able
to fund in a hospital that previously had not had the ability to serve
Active Duty soldiers and veterans.
It's a small hospital off the campus of our main Veterans Hospital in
Houston, Texas, but we established a post-traumatic stress disorder
center there that allowed veterans who may not have traditionally been
at the Veterans Hospital, not because they did not have benefits, but
for a variety of reasons, to find a comfort place to be treated for
their post-traumatic stress disorder.
And they were not just veterans of the Afghan and Iraq wars, but
these were ones from the Persian Gulf, from Vietnam. And they could not
thank the staff and could not thank the work that we had done to secure
just a small amount of dollars, which this amendment does.
This takes a small amount of dollars from a very large funding for,
certainly, a commendable challenge, but it is one that I believe would
benefit, as we seek to create a better quality of life for our
soldiers, wherever they might be, and our veterans.
This is a $500,000 deposit, if you will, on the high numbers of post-
traumatic stress disorder. I have seen it in our returning soldiers, I
have seen it in our veterans, and it is clearly something that is not
going away.
I think the poignant story that I want to share is how grateful this
particular veteran was, who said he had never been to treatment and his
whole life had been turned around. His wife was there with him. She
said their lives have been turned around.
So I ask my colleagues to consider the responsible approach that we
have taken for just this amount of money to reinvest in our needy, but
deserving, men and women who are both Active Duty. In the instance of
the story that I gave, because this facility was able to utilize
TRICARE, they could serve Active Duty, and they could serve those who
were veterans as well.
{time} 1545
So I thank the chairman and ranking member and urge support of the
amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I'm not exactly sure how this is targeted or
how it would support the $125 million increase already in this bill.
PTSD is a serious issue. It's becoming more serious as time goes on and
as our men and women return from the battlefield. And so we understand
the importance of the program. We did increase it by $125 million.
This amendment, I think, is positive, and I'm not going to oppose it.
I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
Again, I would not be opposed to the gentlewoman's amendment but
would want to make the observation, given the observation I made in my
opening comments, that I do wish she had chosen a different account for
the offset.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, PTSD is going to be with us for
a long time because there are men and women returning from the
battlefield who believe they don't have PTSD or don't want to admit to
the fact that they have it. I can certainly understand why they do not
want that on their record. But, nevertheless, it is going to show up;
and when it shows up, we need to be prepared to care for those who have
fought this battle.
And so I support the gentlelady's amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm overwhelmed and very grateful to
Chairman Young, my dear friend who has done so much, as well as the
ranking member, likewise, for his great service. He's done so much.
Let me just conclude by saying that PTSD, as both the chairman and
the ranking member have agreed, is an invisible wound that you don't
often see. One of the best ways to increase access to treatment is to
increase the medical facilities and also the medical professionals.
These additional dollars, as I understand the intent of both the
ranking member and chairman, will be used effectively.
Post-traumatic stress disorder is one of the most prevalent,
devastating psychological wounds suffered by the brave men and women. I
ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 printed in
House Report 113-170.
[[Page H4914]]
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 16, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $25,100,000)''.
Page 30, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $25,100,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 10
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that I'm introducing
with my colleague, Ms. Gabbard from Hawaii, that would simply restore
funding to the fiscal year '13 levels for cleanup and safety in public
areas.
We take great pride in the United States in our military being the
best trained and most powerful fighting force in the world, but decades
of military operations and training have left a toxic legacy of
dangerous explosives and harmful chemicals on millions of acres in this
country. The Department of Defense has an obligation to remediate these
dangerous areas, often in public or residential areas, in a timely
fashion. This contaminated real estate contains housing, schools,
parks, and playgrounds in every State and almost every congressional
district in our country.
To help the Department of Defense become a better partner for our
communities and our constituents, I urge you to join me in supporting
funding for a program that will employ skilled, high-tech companies to
clean up these dangerous liabilities and create opportunities for
economic development on land that is currently a danger.
Just last month, at the height of the tourist season, Maryland
officials were forced to shut down Assateague Island after a visitor
noticed unexploded ordnance, or UXO, had washed ashore. Upon further
investigation, they found hundreds of pieces of UXO that were
discovered and had to be detonated onsite.
Our constituents demand that the United States lead by example.
Keeping our families safe requires us to return the land to productive
uses by paying for and cleaning up the mess we make. The Department of
Defense agrees. Before the House Budget Committee last year, Secretary
of Defense Leon Panetta, when asked if there were a way to create a
partnership between local communities and the Department of Defense,
said:
I'd be more than happy to engage you in that process. The
only way to ultimately achieve savings is to be able to have
the cleanup and do it expeditiously. There are lots of things
I think we can do to improve the process.
I appreciated Chairman Young's reply on the House floor last July.
When asked if the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee could commit to
helping increase funding for environmental remediation on Formerly Used
Defense Sites, Chairman Young said:
I say absolutely yes. I would very much like to do this,
because I believe we need to do it. We hope to have an
opportunity this year to do it right.
The funding levels would restore the DERP-FUDS account to fiscal year
'13 levels by redirecting $25.1 million from the Ground Combat Vehicle,
a program whose utility has been called into question by the CBO and
CRS. It would take a modest reduction in funding by less than one-half
of 1 percent. But restoring funding to this program would still mean
that funding for this vital cleanup would be less than one-twentieth of
1 percent of defense spending.
At the current rate, the estimate is that it will take 250 years to
clean up these sites. I find this embarrassing, frankly. I would hope
that this would be the least we could do to keep faith with people who
are at risk because the military has not cleaned up after itself. It's
Congress that needs to step up and provide the funding so that the
Department of Defense can do what it wants to do.
I yield the balance of my time to the coauthor of this amendment, the
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized for 2 minutes.
Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, due to its strategic location in the
Pacific, my home of Hawaii has long been at the forefront of our
Nation's conflicts. We have more than 100 Formerly Used Defense Sites
just as a result of a defensive buildup pre-World War I and, later, in
the massive rush to mobilize in World War II. These sites, often also
referred to as FUDS, can be littered with dangerous unexploded bombs
and shells, in addition to harmful chemicals.
As in Hawaii, Formerly Used Sites across the country--in every State
and congressional district--can serve as housing developments, schools,
parks, and playgrounds, areas that can be used productively. The Army
Corps of Engineers has been working diligently to clean up unexploded
ordnance from many sites in Hawaii, many of which I visited myself,
including 135,000-acre Waikoloa Maneuver Area on the Big Island of
Hawaii. During World War II, this area was home to some 50,000 U.S.
servicemembers who trained and prepared for many of the historic
battles that were fought in the Pacific.
One of the places that I visited and met with many elementary and
middle school students was Waimea Middle School, where unexploded
ordnance has been found within the last few years by these students
themselves. You are talking about 9-, 10-, 11-, 12-year-old students
who have to be trained in this day and age to identify what an
unexploded ordnance looks like and how to report it. This is not
something that we should be facing in our society today.
The effort to clean up these Formerly Used Defense Sites not only
makes our communities safer, but has a significant and positive
economic impact. There have been substantial investments in the
training of local people in Hawaii to do this highly skilled and often
dangerous work. By training these local people, we're actually saving
taxpayer dollars because we're not having to import talent, pay per
diem and all these other exorbitant costs, and we're providing jobs to
the local community.
I sponsor this amendment because Congress has a responsibility to
ensure that the Department of Defense has the resources it needs to
clean up these dangerous unexploded munitions.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. This amendment would add $25 million for the
purpose of restoring these Formerly Used Defense Sites by cutting the
same amount from the Army RDTE account for research and development.
As important as this amendment might be, Army research and
development is extremely important to the soldiers on the battlefield.
In today's battlefield in Afghanistan, we're facing an enemy that is
constantly moving. As we move one direction, they move another
direction. As we present a new device, a new weapon, a new system, they
develop a way to get around it. It's important that we continue to fund
Army research and development.
The President requested $237.4 million for this purpose. We added an
additional $25 million for the cleanup of these sites over the
President's budget request. The funding provided in the RDTE Army
account supports critical research in Army laboratories and in colleges
and universities across our country to ensure that our soldiers have
the best that we can provide them as they face an enemy that is
constantly moving on the battlefield. Unnecessary reductions to Army
research and development is just not right, especially when we have
already added the additional money over and above the President's
budget request.
We understand the importance of restoring these sites, but we also
understand the importance of maintaining our research and development
for the soldier on the battlefield to have the most advanced technology
and the most advanced weapons that he or she can possibly have to carry
out their mission and to protect themselves while they're doing it.
So I must oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
[[Page H4915]]
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 printed in House
Report 113-170.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I withdraw amendment No. 11.
The CHAIR. The Chair understands amendment No. 11 will not be
offered.
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
{time} 1600
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the chairman of the subcommittee and I thank
the ranking member of the subcommittee.
Madam Chair, let me, first of all, acknowledge the hard work that it
takes to provide for the men and women of the United States military
and to secure America. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee,
I am well aware of the combined efforts, obviously, in the military and
the line of demarcation between civilian, but we all are committed to
the national security of this Nation.
This amendment deals with the reduction in funding of the procurement
Defense-wide by $1 million. I want to give the good news. The good news
is that this money would be put in deficit reduction. But I do want to
acknowledge that one of the issues that we must address as we go
forward in the collective intelligence agencies, as we have listened to
some of the challenges that we are facing in light of the present
status of the leaks that have occurred by an American citizen who was
working in the capacity as a contractor--this impacts all of us. So as
this $1 million would be submitted into the deficit reduction pool, I
believe it is extremely important that we look very closely at the
extended use of civilian contractors, the extended use of a budget that
is responsible for 70 percent of the intelligence of this country.
Now, I know that some of the contractors deal with issues that are
not individual personnel, but are dealing with research and dealing
with equipment. But I believe that it is important that we look at the
question that resulted in the disclosure of leaked and highly sensitive
classified information, and the continuing raising of concern of
whether or not the national security of this Nation has been impacted
because of the outsourcing of intelligence responsibility.
In particular, I think we need to look at the outsourcing of
determining top secret clearance. Obviously, the circumstances that
resulted in the leaking is an individual that had an interesting
resume, from the educational level of a high school GED--of which we
respect and encourage people to complete their education--of the
military service, and then on to top secret by a contractor who gave
out top secret clearances. We hope that there was some kind of review.
So my amendment is intended to highlight this issue.
I would hope that as we proceed, that this question will, if you
will, have the ability to slow--not halt--the use of civilian
contractors out of all of our agencies dealing with the issue of
intelligence. We want to assure the American people that we are
concerned about the protection of this Nation's national security--
civil liberties as well, but also to prevent the leaks that have
occurred.
Let me conclude my remarks and let me just say that I hope this
brings about a discussion that will cross jurisdictional lines of the
Judiciary Committee, the Intelligence Committee, our appropriators.
Let's fix this enormous use and reliance on these contractors'
outsourcing. Let's develop a highly trained group of Federal
Governmental professionals committed, if you will, to the ongoing
service to their Nation. Respecting contractors have the same loyalty,
but I think it would be better, Mr. Chairman, if we can frame the
utilization of contractors in such a way that we can be assured that
everything that deals with the national security of this Nation will be
protected.
With that, I will withdraw the amendment.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 13 printed in House Report 113-170.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Young and
Mr. Visclosky for their leadership for an important responsibility in
this Nation.
My amendment increases funding for the Defense Health Program's
research and development by $10 million. These funds will address the
question of breast cancer in the United States military.
The American Cancer Society calls several strains of breast cancer as
a particularly aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates;
in this instance, it's a triple negative. But I raise an article that
says: ``Fighting a Different Battle; Breast Cancer and the Military.''
We all know, by the way, that breast cancer can affect both men and
women. The bad news is breast cancer has been just about as brutal on
women in the military as combat. Let me say that sentence again. Breast
cancer has been just about as brutal on women in the military as
combat. More than 800 women have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan,
according to the Army Times; 874 military women were diagnosed with
breast cancer just between 2000 and 2011. And according to that same
study, more are suspected. It grows.
The good news is that we have been working on it, and I want to add
my appreciation to the military. This, however, will allow for the
additional research. As new young women come into the United States
military, as women stay longer in the United States military, as women
get older in the United States military, as women ascend to leadership
roles in the United States military, these dollars provide research.
Not only is breast cancer striking relatively young military women at
an alarming rate, but male servicemembers, veterans and their
dependents are at risk as well. With a younger and generally healthier
population, those in the military tend to have a lower risk for most
cancers than civilians--including significantly lower colorectal, lung
and cervical--but breast cancer is a different story.
Military people in general, and in some cases very specifically, are
at a significantly greater risk for contracting breast cancer, says Dr.
Richard Clapp, a top cancer expert at Boston University who works at
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on military breast
cancer issues. He says life in the military can mean exposure to a
witch's brew of risk factors directly linked to greater chances of
getting breast cancer.
So, my friends, I am asking that we do the right thing. We're on the
right track, we're on the right rail, we're on the right road. But with
the expansion of women in the military, I can assure you, for long
life, a vital service that
[[Page H4916]]
these men and women give, it is extremely important to move forward
with this amendment.
Researchers point to a high use of oral contraception that's linked
to breast cancer among women that would ensure that this particular
amendment would be a positive step forward.
So I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. With
that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition
to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the recognition. And I think I speak for
the subcommittee when I will suggest that we would be delighted to
accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentlemen, and thank them for their
commitment to the men and women of the United States military. And let
me thank my colleagues for accepting this amendment.
With that, I know that we will be safer, secure and healthier with
this fight against breast cancer that continues to grow in the United
States military.
I ask my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Young of Florida
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 312,
I offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 83, 86, 87, 88,
89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 96, printed in House Report No. 113-170,
offered by Mr. Young of Florida:
Amendment No. 83 Offered by Mr. Lowenthal of California
Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000)''.
Amendment No. 86 Offered by Mr. Griffin of Arkansas
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to cancel or modify the avionics modernization
program of record for C-130 aircraft.
Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Hunter of California
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following new section:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to--
(1) plan for, consider, or carry out any action to remove
any portion of the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in San
Diego, California;
(2) convey, or authorize the conveyance of, such memorial;
or
(3) plan for or accept any reimbursement for any action
described in paragraph (1) or (2).
Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Kline of Minnesota
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Department of Defense to grant an enlistment
waiver for an offense within offense code 433 (rape, sexual
abuse, sexual assault, criminal sexual abuse, incest, or
other sex crimes), as specified in Table 1 of the memorandum
from the Under Secretary of Defense with the subject line
``Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08-018--`Enlistment
Waivers' '', dated June 27, 2008 (incorporating Change 3,
March 20, 2013).
Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mr. Nunes of California
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 10002. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used by the Secretary of the Air Force to reduce the
force structure at Lajes Field, Azores, Portugal, below the
total number of military and civilian personnel assigned to
Lajes Field on October 1, 2012.
Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Runyan of New Jersey
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the Operation and Maintenance funds made
available in this Act may be used in contravention of section
41106 of title 49, United States Code.
Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mrs. Bustos of Illinois
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 10002. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to enter into a contract for the purchase of an
American flag if the flag is certified (pursuant to the
Federal Acquisition Regulation) as a foreign end product.
Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Engel of New York
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Department of Defense to lease or purchase new
light duty vehicles for any executive fleet, or for an
agency's fleet inventory, except in accordance with
Presidential Memorandum--Federal Fleet Performance, dated May
24, 2011.
Amendment No. 93 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 10002. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to enter into a contract with any offeror or any
of its principals if the offeror certifies, pursuant to the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of
its principals--
(1) within a three-year period preceding this offer has
been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it
for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection
with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public
(Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation
of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the
submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft,
forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records,
making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal
criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property; or
(2) are presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or
civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of
any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1); or
(3) within a three-year period preceding this offer, has
been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount
that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains
unsatisfied.
Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following new section:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to engage in an act covered by or described in
section 2340A of title 18, United States Code.
Amendment No. 95 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for flag or general officers for each military
department that are in excess to the number of such officers
serving in such military department as of the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Amendment No. 96 Offered by Mr. LoBiondo of New Jersey
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to fund the performance of any Department of Defense
flight demonstration team at a location outside the United
States.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky)
each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lowenthal).
Mr. LOWENTHAL. I'd like to thank Chairman Young and also Ranking
Member Visclosky for providing me the time to speak today.
Mr. Chairman, providing STEM education to America's youth is critical
to the global competitiveness of our Nation. This will rely, however,
on a solid pipeline of STEM-degree graduates.
I stand here today to offer my revenue-neutral STARBASE amendment No.
99 to H.R. 2397, the Department of Defense Appropriations, to increase
funding to the STARBASE youth program by $5 million.
STARBASE is currently active in 79 congressional districts throughout
the country and engages local fifth-grade elementary students by
exposing them to STEM subjects through an inquiry-based curriculum. The
program is carried out by the military services because the Department
of Defense has identified a shortage of young adults graduating from
these difficult and hard sciences.
The STARBASE academies work with school districts to engage students
through ``hands-on, mind-on,'' experiential activities. They study
engineering, nanotechnology, navigation and mapping. These are all
critical
[[Page H4917]]
fields that will keep our country competitive.
My no-cost, revenue-neutral amendment makes a significant step
towards providing and engaging America's youth with the tools they need
to pursue careers in STEM, a field where jobs are available and there
is a significant lack of trained workers.
A recent Brookings Institution study said that as of 2011, there are
now 26 million U.S. jobs--or approximately 20 percent of all jobs in
the country--that require a high level of knowledge in any one of the
STEM fields. I urge my colleagues to support this revenue-neutral
amendment to H.R. 2396. Our students and our workforce need this.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Polis
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. POLIS. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $107,000,000)''.
Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $107,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, as Members of Congress, one of our greatest
responsibilities is to keep our country safe and invest our resources
wisely, especially when it comes to securing the safety of our country.
The Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program is a missile system
that is supposed to be designed to deflect missiles from rogue states
like Iran and North Korea. That would be great if it worked. It is a
system with a long history of failure, and military leaders have
expressed doubts for years about the viability of this program.
I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment, which would return
the funding level for the GMD program back to the Pentagon's own
request level in the fiscal year 2014 Defense appropriations bill.
Specifically, my amendment cuts funding for the GMD missiles by $107
million and applies those savings to deficit reduction.
Lacking a single successful test intercept since December 2008, the
GMD program is simply a failure so far. These repeated failures
unfortunately have not stopped us from continuing to authorize over $1
billion for the GMD program to purchase 14 additional missiles on top
of the 30 we already have in the NDAA Act of 2013.
The Government Accountability Office has noted that the testing of
the system to date has been insufficient to verify that it will
function as intended, and there was a most recent test failure on July
5 which supports that assessment from the GAO.
Americans want a missile defense system we can count on. We need to
ensure that our missile defenses are tested and are actually capable of
keeping our families safe and don't merely provide the illusion of
safety. Before we continue to build an arsenal, we should make sure
that it works, as custodians of taxpayer funds.
{time} 1615
Now, of course, those on the other side will argue that we need to
make sure that in an ever more dangerous world we need to have and
invest in the missile defenses to protect against the threats from Iran
and North Korea. Of course, I agree. The issue is whether this works or
not and whether we should reward failure as a Congress and as a
country, or whether we should invest in success.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, we should invest in success and not reward
failure. We need to be candid about the challenges we face. Deterring
threats and encouraging diplomacy is crucial to keeping America safe.
Our national security, the safety of Americans is too important to rely
on programs that have failed test after test when we need to have
confidence that when we need them, they will work.
If we are serious about cutting wasteful spending here in Congress,
we need to be willing to take a close look at programs like the GMD and
find ways to trim spending and increase our national security. We can
do this by building a leaner, more agile, more affordable military that
is suited to the 21st century, while being diligent in ensuring that
our existing systems can keep us safe and operate as they are intended
to.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I am reminded that when two
airplanes hit two buildings, it cost our economy $2 trillion and many
thousands of lives. It occurs to me that sometimes we are fairly
shortsighted. Sometimes even as conservative fiscally as I am,
sometimes in this Chamber we don't look to our primary duty and we
become penny-wise and very pound-foolish.
One nuclear armed missile coming into the United States could ruin
our whole day. I am astonished sometimes at the lack of insight to this
very real problem.
The system that we are speaking of today, the GMD, is the only system
that we have tested that is successfully capable of defending this
country against intercontinental ballistic missiles carrying nuclear
warheads or other ordnance.
Mr. Chairman, I just find it astonishing that President Obama and his
supporters have cut funding for our missile defenses every year they
have been in office. They criticize these programs when there are test
failures or delays that have been made worse by their slashing and
burning of the program.
Mr. Chairman, I am convinced that the cost of failing in this area is
simply too high. While the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System did
miss its target on a July 5 test, it was one test. It has been
successfully tested repeatedly since the 1999 testing began. This
administration has not offered funding for testing this system since
2008.
Mr. Chairman, it should not shock us that when we don't test our
systems, sometimes they don't always perform perfectly. If we cut
funding for systems that don't have a perfect test record, we are
doomed to have no protection at all.
Every sophisticated program in the Defense Department has had
technical challenges at some time. But GMD's technical challenges are
not insurmountable. We must commit to support these systems to see
these challenges through.
The amendment that Mr. Polis has offered would strike $107 million
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act. It would
actually, because the authority for multi-year procurement would then
be done away with, this Polis amendment actually costs the taxpayers
money.
I would just ask the gentleman: If not this system, what other system
would he suggest that would protect our country against a potential
situation where an intercontinental ballistic missile were coming into
the homeland? I would ask him to consider that.
I would now yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Colorado
(Mr. Lamborn).
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment by
the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. Chairman, the House has rejected these amendments--this and a
following amendment by the gentleman from Colorado--on the National
Defense Authorization Act already this year.
This amendment would strike the funding provided in this bill to
provide for multi-year procurement authority of booster motors for the
ground-based interceptors, GBIs, that Secretary Hagel announced the
United States would deploy this past March.
This amendment, if it were adopted, and perhaps this is
unintentional, but it would actually cost the United States as much as
$200 million.
[[Page H4918]]
Perhaps the gentleman is opposed to the Obama administration's
missile defense policy as articulated by Secretary of Defense Hagel. If
so, that is a separate issue.
But when you look at North Korea, you look at Iran, I think it would
be unwise to oppose the decision to add ground-based interceptors.
All that this amendment is doing is raising the price that taxpayers
have to pay for the GBIs that the President and the Secretary of
Defense have said we should buy. This isn't just my position. It is
what the Missile Defense Agency and the CBO have already said: multi-
year procurement will save the taxpayer money.
Now, the reliability issues that the gentleman brought up have
nothing to do with this funding, because this funding talks about
booster motors. Of the 26 tests that involve the GMD system, Ground-
based Missile Defense, 18 of those were 100 percent successful. Of the
remaining eight that had problems, none of them involved the booster
motor. That is the subject of this amendment. So this amendment is
misdirected if it is concerned about the stated concern of reliability.
I can't understand why we would oppose multi-year procurement and
advance procurement of the 14 GBIs that the Defense Department says we
will buy.
Mr. Chairman, I would urge opposition to this amendment.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I would just remind people in
this Chamber that nuclear missiles coming into this country are the
most dangerous weapons that we face, and GMD is the only system that we
have to protect ourselves from it. I hope this amendment will be
defeated, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. To be clear, Mr. Chairman, this amendment saves taxpayer
money and actually reduces the deficit by over $100 million.
I will be happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Visclosky).
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment and would
want to make a couple of things clear to all of my colleagues.
The fact is the administration did ask for money. For the ballistic
missile defense midcourse section in the bill they asked for $1.033
billion this year, fiscal year 2014. This is not absent an
administration request.
Secondly, the gentleman from Arizona said that the bad test and the
problems that they indicate are not unresolvable. I would absolutely
agree with the gentleman, but this is a procurement account. Let us
resolve these problems before we procure something that last month has
not worked so we don't have to pull them out of silos, we don't have to
invest additional taxpayers' money, and we don't have to waste that
hard-earned money.
There are threats, and we ought to make sure the systems we deploy to
protect our Nation work before we procure and deploy them.
I applaud the gentleman for his amendment and strongly support it.
Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman.
It is just simple business sense. It doesn't save money to preorder
something that you don't know works. You don't do that in business. We
as a country shouldn't do it.
This is not a theoretical discussion about advance purchasing or
economies of scale. When things work there's a legitimate discussion
about that. It is absolutely foolish--foolish--to throw good taxpayer
money after bad before our system has proven to work to keep America
safe.
I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment and yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $85,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
This amendment simply reduces Research Development Test & Evaluation
funds for the new Ohio-class nuclear-armed submarine by 10 percent.
Bear in mind, we are facing 10 percent sequestration cuts over the next
decade. This will help the Navy plan for the likely effects of
sequestration by cutting Cold War weapons rather than what the military
really needs.
These replacement submarines are unaffordable and will weaken the
surface Navy. They are expected to cost $6 billion per boat on average
with a plan to procure 12 of them.
According to a report from the Arms Control Association, the
operating cost of this replacement will be $347 billion lifetime. Even
the Navy's own shipbuilding plan for fiscal year 2014 said:
Replacing the Ohio-class submarines will have a
disproportionate impact on Navy shipbuilding plans.
It comes at the expense of other shipbuilding abilities and naval
readiness. There are far more effective job creation plans than to
undertake this initiative.
Our amendment offers a more balanced approach. We can easily afford
to phase down or slow the replacement submarine program. The Navy can
deploy 1,000 nuclear warheads on its submarines--as planned under the
New START Treaty--with eight Ohio-class submarines, which means this
modest cut can be easily handled.
The Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have determined that the
United States can provide for its security with fewer nuclear weapons.
Yet nuclear acquisition programs are racing to preserve the current
size of today's nuclear force.
Instead of wasting billions of dollars on weapons the Pentagon says
it will not need, we should realign our budgets with the reality that
the United States plans to reduce its nuclear arsenal.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I remind my colleagues that we have
already cut the defense budget pretty drastically, and nuclear weapons
exist in today's world. I might not like it, you might not like it, we
might wish they didn't exist, but they do exist.
Because nuclear weapons exist in this world, we need to have the
ability to defend against them and also deter their use. That is
important to our national security.
We do that through what we call the nuclear triad. We have the
capability to launch nuclear missiles from silos that are based on
land, we have the ability to launch nuclear-capable missiles from
airplanes, we also have the ability to launch nuclear-capable missiles
from submarines that are somewhere in these vast oceans.
Of those three of the triad, the nuclear submarine, or the submarine
with nuclear capability, is the most survivable because you can blow up
a silo, you can shoot down an airplane, but it is almost impossible to
find a submarine somewhere in the ocean that has this nuclear
capability. Because it is the most survivable, then it is the best
deterrent, because we know what it can do and our enemies know what it
can do.
Right now, we are planning to replace what is called the Ohio-class
submarines to continue this capability. This is a capability that has
kept us safe for the last 60 years. It is still important to our long-
term national security. If we adopt this amendment, we will begin to
cripple this capability, and that is bad for our national security.
[[Page H4919]]
I would urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.
I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).
{time} 1630
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
I'd like to just sort of add a few points to the gentleman's prior
comments.
First of all, the fleet is not being replaced one to one--the current
fleet size is 14, and the new fleet will be 12. The program has already
been delayed by 2 years because of earlier reductions in the defense
budget. That 2-year delay is going to push us right up to 2021, which
is when the aging fleet which is in play right now is going to start
being decommissioned over time in terms of the reduction. Because of
investment in design and development, which is what this amendment is
focused on, we have saved $2 billion per vessel from where the Navy
started when this project first commenced a number of years ago. It was
$7 billion, and we are down to $5 billion per boat in terms of the
projected costs that the Navy has actually come forward with.
I would just lastly note that the strategic review, which has been
done under Secretary Gates and under Secretary Hagel, has repeatedly
put SSBN replacement at the absolute apex in terms of national defense
priorities, again, for a lot of the reasons the prior speaker
indicated. Sea-based nuclear deterrence fits in perfectly well with the
START Treaty, but as for the math of eight subs for 1,000 warheads, if
you're going to have sailors being back home after deployment and if
you're going to have repairs and maintenance, you'll need 12 as a bare
minimum--a far cry from the Cold War days when 41 for Freedom was
actually the size of this fleet.
We are now down to the bare bones, and we should not cut it any
further. I would oppose the amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
Mr. KILMER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise not only as the Representative of the area that
includes Naval Base Kitsap, which is the home port of eight SSBNs and
60 percent of the Navy's SSBN force, but I rise with a nonparochial
interest as well.
I am in opposition to this amendment because we know the SSBNs, or
the Ohio-class subs, have been a pillar of our national defense for
over three decades. These subs and their crews act as peacekeepers
around the world every single day. They are amongst our most
significant assets for a continued forward-presence and are a strategic
deterrent around the world. Our country, our Navy, and our sailors
cannot afford to delay the recapitalization of this platform.
While I thank the gentleman from Oregon for bringing this forward, I
urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I listened to my good friend from Florida, and I
agree in terms of the necessity of having a strong nuclear deterrent,
but he just ticked off that we would still have the air-based bombers
and we would have land-based missiles. Even with eight nuclear
submarines, we would have more than enough capacity.
Now, the historic arguments, I think, are a little bit distorted.
Each of these new submarines carries 16 to 20 missiles. Each missile
today carries four to five nuclear warheads, each 20 times more
powerful than the bombs that decimated Hiroshima. One of these
submarines--two, three, four--is adequate to serve as a deterrent for
anybody going forward, especially when we have our air- and land-based
in addition to this.
We have a deterrent that will make a difference to anybody as we are
moving now to scale down the overall number of warheads, because who is
it that we are deterring? North Korea? It doesn't yet have a missile
that can even get to us, one, and a fraction of the firepower would
destroy it. We could wreck China. We could decimate the Soviet Union.
Deterrence is alive and well with a fraction of this, but embarking on
a program to spend hundreds of billions of dollars--freezing us in time
with, as I mentioned, $347 billion going forward--is foolish. Every
independent analysis suggests that we will be better off in going
forward with being able to right-size the nuclear deterrent. Even the
1,000 is probably more than we need today.
If we can't come to grips with the fact that we are spending hundreds
of billions of dollars on things that don't make us any safer, that we
can't afford, and that come at the expense of operational activities
for our military that do matter, we are going to be trapped in this
downward budget spiral, wasting tax dollars, not making America safer,
not making it stronger, and not being able to have resources for things
that would be of a higher priority for our military.
Now, notwithstanding all of the hyperbole here, this is a modest 10
percent reduction in the development resources. It's not going to stop
our going forward, but it will be a signal to maybe take a deep breath
and look at how we do this most effectively. I would strongly urge the
approval of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Pocan
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $12,010,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to introduce an amendment to
the Defense appropriations bill, and I want to thank Chairman Young and
Ranking Member Visclosky for their efforts on this important
legislation.
My amendment would help improve the safety of advanced batteries,
which are critical to both our new energy economy as well as to our
current and future Department of Defense missions.
Advanced energy technologies not only produce good-paying, high-
quality American jobs, but they also reduce our dependence on foreign
oil, protect the environment, and lead to the advancements of new
energy-efficient sources that are more effective. Thus, it is no
surprise that our military requires this type of innovative technology
to meet its expanding needs. Longer lasting energy sources mean our
military's transportation and weapons systems are more effective in the
field and limit safety risks that arise from refueling or recharging.
More efficient energy capabilities mean a more efficient, more
effective, and safer military.
On that front, lithium-ion batteries represent some of the most
significant clean energy advancements of our recent history: they
contain no toxic chemicals; they have up to three times the performance
capabilities of other battery products; and they are required for many
of the military's next generation weapons systems. Their need will only
increase, but as often is the case with new technologies, improvements
need to be made in order to ensure their safe and effective use.
Current lithium-ion batteries can cause violent fires with extreme
smoke and high temperatures that are potentially catastrophic,
especially on ships. As a result of these safety concerns, the
acceptance and adoption of many lithium-ion-powered Navy systems under
development are greatly delayed,
[[Page H4920]]
thus greatly limiting our ability to respond to emerging threats.
None of us here want to have any members of our military in danger,
but we don't have to choose between improving our operational
capabilities and keeping our courageous servicemembers safe. We are not
far away from these types of advancements. New research has produced
high-temperature material compounds that can significantly extend the
maximum temperatures at which the batteries can safely operate.
We need to continue to develop and test these innovative compounds
that require further research and development support. That is why I
introduced this budget-neutral amendment, which I am proud to have
introduced with Congressman Cardenas--to provide for the necessary
funding for research, development, and testing to improve the safety of
advanced batteries.
I now yield 2 minutes to my friend from California, Congressman
Cardenas.
Mr. CARDENAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Congressman
Pocan's amendment, which increases the Navy Research, Testing,
Development, and Evaluation account by $10 million. This would support
research, improving the safety of advanced batteries, specifically
lithium-ion batteries. This amendment does not add new funding to the
bill.
Lithium-ion is the present and future of our energy storage
technology. This technology is critical to U.S. military personnel for
communications, navigation, and vehicles on land and in the sea, air,
and space. It is also important to many other sectors of the economy,
including to the utility companies, transportation, aviation,
aerospace, and medical devices.
As we have seen with recent airliner incidents, we can do more to
address the safety of these batteries. Without improving that safety,
we cannot fully realize the potential of lithium-ion technology.
Without realizing that potential, we cannot improve our production
capability here in the United States of America.
The global market for lithium batteries was worth more than $11
billion in 2012, and it is expected to double to $22 billion by 2016.
Right now, the U.S. has a very small market share of the lithium-ion
industry. The bulk of the industry is in Japan, China, and Korea.
Investments like this are critical to growing the U.S. industrial base
and in creating middle class manufacturing jobs. Funding research and
development for this cutting-edge technology can ensure that the
lithium-ion industry grows right here in America. With that growth
comes more government and commercial applications.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. As an electrical
engineer myself, I am very, very proud of the innovation of the United
States of America, but little by little, we see that slipping away to
other countries. Yet, at the same time, if we just invest a little,
this $10 million will yield billions of dollars in the future.
Mr. POCAN. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I certainly appreciate what my colleague from
Wisconsin is trying to do with his amendment. As a former chairman and
ranking member on the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, I
certainly attach great importance to battery research. Mr.
Frelinghuysen is on the floor as well, who chairs Energy and Water.
The concern I do have is to make sure that we are organized as the
Federal Government on this research and that we are looking at the
appropriate expenditure in the appropriate places for the funds.
One example I simply would give is that, in this 2014 fiscal year's
Energy and Water appropriations bill, $24 million was provided to the
Joint Center for Energy Research, a DOE energy innovative hub. This
hub, which team includes five of the national laboratories and several
major research universities, is seeking new technologies to move in the
direction that my colleague supports.
So I do appreciate his long-term goal. Obviously, we have to reduce
our dependency on carbon fossil fuel from a national security
perspective, but, again, I want to make sure that we are cautious as
far as where and how much of this money we can effectively spend in the
coming fiscal year.
I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Is there some movement to withdraw this?
Mr. POCAN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. POCAN. If I understand correctly, the chairman and the ranking
member have said we can continue to have this conversation. In
recognition of that, I would be glad at this time to withdraw my
amendment.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I look forward to working with the gentleman.
Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Nugent
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 31, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,500,000)''.
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $12,500,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Nugent) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
{time} 1645
Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, it's not every day I get to stand up here
in front of the House and talk about a government program that is
actually doing well and running ahead of schedule, but that's what
brings me here today.
The Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Missile Project, or
CHAMP for short, is an Air Force program to develop a capability to
disrupt or eliminate an adversary's electronics without causing
physical destruction to people or facilities. The only real question
with CHAMP is what vehicle to use to deliver that microwave to the
intended target.
As it turns out, we have an available stockpile of cruise missiles
which are expensive to build and for which we have no other use.
Fitting CHAMP into our existing cruise missiles is far cheaper than
trying to construct a new vehicle just for that purpose. My amendment,
which is fully offset, would provide $10.5 million toward that end.
By making this investment now, we can ensure that CHAMP will be able
to put this weapon in the field years ahead of schedule and at a lower
cost, while also continuing to develop a longer-term solution. It's a
shame that fixing every government program isn't as simple as this.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I rise in opposition because of where the funds for
the gentleman's amendment are coming from.
The amendment would use funds from a committee priority, the Defense
Rapid Innovation program. This program emphasizes technology
development issues done primarily through small businesses.
Certainly, in my short time as ranking member on this subcommittee, I
have been impressed by the lack of a true small business program at the
Department of Defense, despite their protestations. DOD's track record
of support for small businesses must be improved for many reasons, not
the least of which is what small businesses provide to solve major
issues for the Department. In the 2 years of program execution so far,
fiscal years 2011 and 2012, the Department of Defense has received over
3,000 proposals for funding. This includes 2,200 proposals from small
businesses across America for fiscal year 2012 funding for completion
and execution this year.
Again, my concern is where the money is coming from in this
amendment, and I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
[[Page H4921]]
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, all I can tell you is this: the offset from
the Rapid Innovation Fund--currently the outlay rate, I think, for the
first year was 43 percent from that fund.
This is a ready project. This is actually one that the Air Force has
tested in a positive manner with positive results in regards to
actually eliminating a threat without destroying a building or without
destroying lives. If we had something like this when we went into Iraq
or that area, we possibly could have done something without having to
rebuild an entire infrastructure while still doing what we needed to do
to be able to do our military mission.
Mr. Chairman, all I can tell you is that it is, in fact, a program
that is working. It just needs a delivery vehicle. This is offset in
regards to no additional spending that would be required, other than
what comes from that fund that is sitting there. That's what that rapid
development fund was actually designed for.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Heck of Nevada
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $15,000,000) (increased by $15,000,000)''.
Page 86, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
Page 86, line 22, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Nevada (Mr. Heck) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada.
Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, since its inception, the Iron Dome
system has achieved tremendous success defeating rockets fired at the
State of Israel from the Gaza Strip, and I am pleased that the
underlying bill supports the President's request and fully funds this
critical program. However, despite significant investments in this
vital program, the United States has no rights to any of the
proprietary information associated with that system.
My amendment would provide $15 million for the Israeli Iron Dome
short-range defense system to initiate co-production of missile
interceptors in the United States. This is $15 million, in addition to
the funds appropriated to support Israel's Iron Dome program, to help
ensure that the U.S. has a role in future production and can leverage
the technology that we have invested in. Specifically, these funds will
support the infrastructure, tooling, transferring data, special test
equipment, and related components for U.S. production.
This amendment will help stabilize U.S. manufacturers who are facing
an uncertain future with U.S. military procurement shrinking in the
face of sequestration. By increasing opportunities for U.S.
manufacturers, we will help support our Nation's struggling economy,
while supporting and creating critical jobs here at home.
This funding will also provide a second source of production for
Israel, who can leverage the rate-production capabilities of American
firms to ensure that necessary quantities of Iron Dome interceptors are
fielded as rapidly as possible. Providing this funding will ensure that
our most critical ally in the Middle East, Israel, has the necessary
capacity to defend itself against rocket attacks launched by Hamas.
In March of 2013, during President Obama's trip to Israel, the
commander of the Israeli Air Defense Command, Brigadier General Shohat,
spoke of the need for U.S. co-production of Iron Dome missile
interceptors.
In response to concerns about future missile interceptor shortfalls
and the desire to increase Israel's Iron Dome deployment from 5 to 13
batteries, the general stated:
What would be impacted is the pace at which we equip
ourselves. Bottom line, I need as many air defense units as
possible and as quickly as possible.
By accepting this amendment, the House will ensure that Israel has
the capability, as well as the capacity, to defend itself.
Further, in written testimony provided to the House Armed Services
Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Director of the Missile Defense Agency
Vice Admiral James Syring indicated that the Missile Defense Agency was
actively seeking Iron Dome co-production opportunities and was
negotiating to obtain available technical data packages and data
rights. This amendment will ensure that funding is available to move
forward on this important effort.
During consideration of H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization
Act of 2014, by the House Armed Services Committee, I offered an
amendment to authorize funding for co-production of Iron Dome, which
was unanimously agreed to. Additionally, the House of Representatives
authorized this funding when it voted to pass the fiscal year 2014 NDAA
last month.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, in order to offset the cost of this co-
production, my amendment reduces two applied research programs within
the Defense-wide RDT&E. Specifically, it reduces applied research in
joint munitions technology by $5 million and reduces funding for
applied research in chemical and biological defense programs by $10
million. These modest reductions conform to the funding levels
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act and ensure that
these programs still receive adequate and appropriate funding.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment ensures that Israel has the capacity to
defend itself while providing the U.S. the ability to leverage our
significant investments in Israel's Iron Dome short-range rocket
defense program.
I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment and
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time to speak on the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, this Israeli cooperative program is
an important program, and the Israelis are very good and loyal allies
of ours. So we support the gentleman's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heck).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19
printed in House Report 113-170.
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I have an
amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman
from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico.
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, In 1990, the
existing U.S. satellite-communications capacity would not support the
warfighters during the first gulf war. The United States made an urgent
attempt to launch an additional Defense Satellite Communication System
III spacecraft to support the war effort; but it was not until February
11, 1992, more than a year after the war ended, that the mission was
finally launched.
In nearly every national space policy guidance document, resiliency
and responsiveness are key objectives in global communications,
navigation,
[[Page H4922]]
and guided munitions, all of which rely on satellites that provide
game-changing advantages on the battlefield. Before Operationally
Responsive Space, ORS, was established, the capacity to rapidly develop
and deploy satellites was inadequate. ORS's mission is to respond to
emerging, persistent, or unanticipated needs and quickly deploy cost-
effective satellites to provide transformational advantages on the
battlefield. ORS has the ability to launch field-ready satellites
within just a few days or weeks. It also rapidly develops, delivers,
and employs new capabilities in a few months to less than a year.
Increased speed for the delivery of space assets not only helps to
close gaps in the United States' space systems capacity; it can also
improve resiliency and reconstitute satellites lost to countermeasures.
In 2007, China used a ground-based missile to destroy one of its own
satellites, demonstrating their capacity to target our satellites and
space-defense systems. Russia is currently developing a sea-based
missile and space-defense system. As other countries modernize their
military, the threat level to our communications, navigation, and
guided munitions satellites intensifies.
ORS has also demonstrated the ability to cost effectively deploy
space assets. General Schwartz said:
ORS is exactly what we need, innovation and greater
efficiency as we contend with ongoing fiscal constraints and
changing space posture.
Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley called ORS ``critical to
our Nation's national security posture, and we need to proceed at the
speed of need.''
Eliminating ORS would cut the very programs that give our Nation's
warfighters their military asymmetric advantage in space. The growing
need for information dominance is driving a remarkable transition in
space systems. ORS is integral to maintaining our advantage in space.
Our amendment reserves $10 million from RDT&E for this program.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair and the ranking member, and I look
forward to continue to work on this important issue.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. I yield to the gentleman
from Indiana.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman yielding
and would point out to my colleagues that on this particular issue she
has been dogged.
I do believe that this is one of a number of items within the bill
where reasonable people can have a disagreement. Certainly the position
that my colleague has from New Mexico is that she believes she has the
most cost-effective approach that the United States Air Force should
take. The problem that we face on the subcommittee, given the financial
and fiscal constraints we have, is that the Air Force did not ask for
funding for this program for fiscal year 2013 or fiscal year 2014. So
we deferred.
I appreciate her concern, and I appreciate her raising it to the body
without making any representations as to what the future holds, but
again would commend her for her work on this program and again her
doggedness on behalf of it.
I appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding.
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my
amendment.
Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Nadler
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $70,200,000)''.
Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $70,200,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Nadler) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
{time} 1700
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
I urge my colleagues to support the Nadler-Garamendi-Polis amendment
to eliminate additional funding for a new, costly, unproven, and
unnecessary missile defense site. Our amendment would cut $70 million
that was added by the Appropriations Committee for an east coast
missile defense system that the Pentagon says it does not want or need.
In a June 10 letter to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl
Levin, Vice Admiral James Syring, director of the Missile Defense
Agency and Lieutenant General Richard Formica, Commander, Joint
Functional Command for Integrated Missile Defense, unequivocally
stated:
There is no validated military requirement to deploy an
east coast missile defense site.
Admiral Syring told the House Armed Services Committee earlier this
year that he would not be able to use additional funds for an east
coast site this year because the Pentagon has only begun to study the
concept. And the Pentagon already has the funding it needs for this
study in FY 2014.
Furthermore, the technology is still unproven at this time. There
have been no successful intercept tests for the past 5 years of the
system that might be deployed on the east coast. The recent test
failure of the ground-based mid-course system that would be deployed on
the east coast is another reason not to rush forward with deployment.
In a time of budget deficits and looming sequester of funds, we
cannot afford to spend money on a program that the military says it
does not yet need and does not yet work. The Pentagon says the current
system, based in Alaska and California, is sufficient to defend the
entire continental United States against a limited attack from North
Korea and Iran.
The CBO says an east coast base would cost approximately $3.5 billion
over the next 5 years. Admiral Syring and General Formica said there
are currently more cost-effective and less expensive alternatives to
improving the defense of the U.S. homeland than an east coast missile
site. It is a pure waste of money to deploy a missile defense site on
the east coast before a need for such a site is identified and before
the interceptors can be proved effective and suitable in operationally
realistic tests. So we should not have this funding now.
I reserve the balance of my time.
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, June 6, 2013.
Vice Admiral James D. Syring, USN,
Director, Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense, Ft.
Belvoir, VA.
Lieutenant General Richard P. Formica, USA,
Commander, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command,
Huntsville, AL.
Dear Vice Admiral Syring and Lieutenant General Formica:
Following the briefing you provided earlier this week, I am
writing to request. your responses to the following questions
regarding possible future options for homeland ballistic
missile defense:
1. Is there currently a validated military requirement to
deploy an East Coast missile defense site?
2. Do you favor Congress mandating the deployment of an
East Coast site before the completion of the pending
Environmental Impact Statement required by section 227 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal-Year 2013
(Public Law 112-239)?
3. At this time do you believe there is a more effective
and less expensive alternative to an East Coast missile
defense site that is also available sooner than deployment of
an East Coast missile defense site?
I would appreciate your responses to these questions no
later than June 10, 2013, so that we may consider them for
our upcoming markup of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2014. I have written the questions in a way
that will hopefully facilitate a prompt and unclassified
response.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin,
Chairman.
____
Department of Defense,
Washington, DC, June 10, 2013.
Hon. Carl Levin,
Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Levin: Thank you for your June 6, 2013,
letter requesting additional information regarding a
potential East Coast Missile Field. The Missile Defense
Agency and the Joint Functional Component Command for
Integrated Missile Defense jointly offer the following
response:
1. Is there currently a validated military requirement to
deploy an East Coast missile defense site?
[[Page H4923]]
Response: There is no validated military requirement to
deploy an East Coast missile defense site.
2. Do you favor Congress mandating the deployment of an
East Coast site before the completion of the pending
Environmental Impact Statement required by Section 227 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
(Public Law 112-239)?
Response: No. We support completing the requirements
mandated by Section 227 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
3. At this time do you believe there is a more cost
effective and less expensive alternative to an East Coast
missile defense site that is also available sooner than
deployment of an East Coast missile defense site?
Response: Yes. Investment in Ballistic Missile Defense
System (BMDS) discrimination and sensor capabilities would
result in more cost-effective near-term improvements to
homeland missile defense. The Department of Defense is
evaluating potential sensors enhancements that could be
pursued to improve the BMDS kill chain and increase threat
discrimination in addition to the evaluation of an additional
interceptor site. While a potential East Coast site would add
operational capability it would also come at significant
materiel development and service sustainment cost. This
evaluation, and others, will serve to inform decisions on our
future BMDS architecture and budget requests.
Thank you for the opportunity to inform the Committee in
advance of its Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense
Authorization Act deliberations. If you have additional
questions, please have your staff contact * * *
Very Respectfully,
J.D. Syring,
Vice Admiral, USN, Director, Missile Defense Agency.
Richard P. Formica,
Lieutenant General, U.S. Army, Commander, Joint Functional
Command for Integrated Missile Defense.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
I rise in opposition to the amendment from the gentleman from New
York. Two Presidents and three Secretaries of Defense recognize the
advantage of an additional missile defense site for a more effective
defense against long-range missile threats from the Middle East.
President Bush wanted to deploy 10 ground-based interceptors in
Poland. President Obama wanted to deploy 24 SM-3 block IIB missiles in
Poland. I would remind my colleague from New York that the additional
idea of a homeland defense site is bipartisan and was supported by
President Obama as recently as this March. But President Obama changed
his mind with the cancellation of the SM-3 block IIB missiles intended
for Poland in 2020, and now we no longer have a third homeland defense
site which the Obama administration supported prior to March 15.
The termination of the SM-3 block IIB missile intended for Poland now
means defense of the homeland against ICBM threats from the Middle East
will not be as strong as originally sought by this President--that's
this President, Mr. Chairman--President Obama, who has cut missile
defense every time he has had the opportunity since he started in the
face of a growing threat, while the centrifuges in Iran continue to
spin.
The warfighters agree an east coast site adds to the defense of the
United States. General Jacoby, NORTHCOM Commander, said:
What a third site gives me, whether it's on the east coast
or an alternate location, would be increased battle space;
that means an increased opportunity for me to engage threats
from either Iran or North Korea.
Mr. Chairman, it's a very simple matter of telemetry and geography.
The east coast site would allow us much greater battle space and not
have to make our West Coast sites travel the entire length of the
continent in order to engage a potential incoming Iranian missile.
Mr. Chairman, I continue to sometimes be amazed. This is the most
dangerous kind of threat that we face in America. The first purpose of
this body is to make sure that the country's defenses are taken care of
and that we provide for the national security of this country. And yet
in a growing threat environment, by colleagues on the other side
continue to want to cut missile defense. Mr. Chairman, I would urge
defeat of this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman and my good friends who serve on these
committees with me, this is not about the President and this is not
about missile defense. This is about the unnecessary expenditure of a
very important national asset--our money.
Testimony given in committee indicates that we may or may not need an
east coast missile defense site. And we also know that the current
missiles that are being used for these anti-ballistic missiles don't
work. At least there's a failure, and there's been repeated failures
just in the boost system, let alone if we can hit Iraq with a rock. So
the problem here is this money should not be spent now for this site.
It is absolutely clear: the Department of Defense from last year's
budget and appropriation has sufficient money to determine where to
locate a site. With regard to the cancellation of the missile that was
discussed a few minutes ago, it doesn't fit in the existing sites, and
so they canceled it because it doesn't fit in the hole in the ground.
So what are we doing here? This is $70 million, not a vast amount of
money when considering the appropriation for the Department of Defense,
but that's $70 million that could be used to--well, how about
protecting a levee of some city in the United States? It could be used
to much better effect.
There was another amendment that I understand that failed that took
another $100 million or so out of this particular thing. We ought to be
taking what money's available and putting it into something that
actually might work, which would be directed energy. But an amendment
for directed energy was refused an opportunity to be heard on the
floor. So we really ought to be thinking seriously about how we move
forward with this. I have great respect for my colleagues, but we ought
not just throw money after other money.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. I thank the gentleman, and I, too, rise in
opposition to this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, according to the Missile Defense Agency estimates
provided in 2012, the cost of 20 silo GBI sites, that's including
missiles, is approximately $3 billion and could be built over a 5-6
year period of time. This cost is almost half the funding the
administration has stripped from MDA in the past 2 years.
These funds are critical today. Iran will not slow down its ballistic
missile program just because the gentleman wants to cut the funds for
our defense. They are testing rocket engines and missiles now.
The Department of Defense tells us also that Iran continues to
advance its space launch and longer-range ballistic missile
capabilities. Iran has used a space-launch vehicle, the Safir-2, to
place a satellite in orbit, demonstrating some of the key technologies
required for an ICBM to be successfully developed.
This was reaffirmed recently by the latest biennial report from
NASIC, the leading experts on ballistic missile intelligence. General
Jacoby, Commander of the U.S. Northern Command stated:
We should consider that Iran has capability in the next few
years of flight testing ICBM-capable technologies.
And:
The Iranians are intent on developing an ICBM.
The Missile Defense Agency's own illustrative briefings to the House
Armed Services Committee have shown that MDA planned to spend funds--
like those appropriated in Chairman Young's mark--while site selection
and EIS processes were underway. These funds absolutely can be spent
today.
That the administration didn't request them is dispositive of
nothing. Chairman Young showed leadership in adding these funds to
match those provided by the FY14 NDAA, and I thank him for that
support. I urge defeat of the Nadler-Garamendi-Polis amendment.
Mr. NADLER. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Garamendi).
[[Page H4924]]
Mr. GARAMENDI. I have great respect for my colleagues on the
subcommittee. However, the argument that has been made is incomplete.
We're talking about whether we're going to spend an additional sum of
money this next year on a program that, A, has large questions about
whether it works; and, B, the military doesn't need the money right
now. If the gentlemen remember the committee hearing, Mr. Chairman, the
general said he didn't need more money now. He had sufficient money
from this year's appropriations for next year carrying on the studies
that are necessary as to where to locate the site. It may not be on the
east coast; it may be elsewhere.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman said that the
testimony was that they did not need the money today for additional
testing, but they do need the money today for deployment, Mr. Chairman.
This administration, throughout its tenure, has weakened our missile
defense capabilities, which protect us against the most dangerous
weapons in the history of humanity. We should not continue to go down
that road. I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, the question is, will we waste the money? We are told
by the director of the Missile Defense Agency and the general
commanding the Joint Functional Command that they cannot use the money.
There is no validated military requirement to deploy an east coast
missile defense site, and he would not be able to use additional funds
for an east coast site this year because they have only begun to study
the concept.
It may be that in the future we may want an east coast site. But to
appropriate this money now is a pure waste of money because now they
are simply studying the concept. They can't spend it; they probably
won't spend it. Why waste the money? I urge people to vote for this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 21 Offered by Ms. Shea-Porter
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21 printed in
House Report 113-170.
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $4,500,000) (increased by $4,500,000)''.
Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $4,500,000) (increased by $4,500,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman
from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Hampshire.
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, today I'm offering an amendment with
my colleague, Congressman LoBiondo, to support veterans with PTSD and
traumatic brain injury, or TBI.
This amendment designates $4.5 million within the peer-reviewed
Psychological Health/Traumatic Brain Injury Research account for a 3-
year study to evaluate the therapeutic service dog training program
currently operating at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence and
Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.
This innovative servicemember dog-training program is designed to a
safe, effective, nondrug intervention to treat the symptoms of PTSD and
TBI. Servicemembers report improvement in their PTSD or TBI symptoms
when participating in a therapeutic service dog training program.
The servicemen and -women involved in this program report a number of
positive results, including lower levels of depression, improved self-
control, improved sleep patterns, a greater sense of purpose, better
integration into their communities, pain reduction, and improved
parenting skills. This year's NDAA House report directed the Secretary
of Defense to conduct whatever studies are necessary to evaluate this
promising program. This amendment provides the resources for such a
study.
There is now considerable anecdotal evidence that training service
dogs reduces the PTSD symptoms of their warrior trainers, and that the
presence of the dogs increases the sense of wellness in servicemembers
and their families.
{time} 1715
The most eloquent testimonials are from servicemember trainees
themselves. One said:
It's been great working with the dogs. They're helping me
with my depression, anxiety and sleep. With a dog at my side,
my stress measurements returned to normal for the first time.
Another:
It's great knowing that I'm helping to train a service dog
for a servicemember who has physical disabilities.
Another:
It's hard for me to put into words how very important
working with these dogs has been to me. Working with the dogs
gave me a purpose again and a way to continue to give back to
soldiers. Training these dogs helps me rebuild my confidence
level and to feel that I'm functioning as an effective member
of the Army and of society.
And one more:
The dog I'm training bonded quickly with my daughter and
me. The dog allowed us to connect in a very positive way.
Working with the dog has taught me patience, which also
carries over to being a parent.
And finally:
Going out into crowded public places has been very hard for
me. However, to train a service dog, you have to lead them
confidently through places like grocery stores and on
underground trains. I find that while I'm teaching the young
dogs how to navigate these places, I am much more comfortable
as well. I'm even learning how to enjoy interaction with
strangers who approach me to talk about the dog.
The soldier also noted:
Being allowed to sleep with a dog that I'm training has
been very helpful. I had been only managing to sleep a couple
of hours a night before being cleared to have a dog spend the
night with me. That night I slept almost 6 hours and I had no
nightmares. I awake so much more refreshed. My wife has noted
the improvement as well.
The dogs that these servicemembers with PTSD train become highly
skilled service dogs for veterans with disabilities, while the Warrior-
trainers reap the therapeutic benefits of training them. This amendment
is a win-win-win. It's good for returning vets, it helps combat PTSD,
and it doesn't add a dime to the deficit.
I and Congressman LoBiondo urge you to support these promising
research efforts.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time to speak on the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We're pleased to accept the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. O'Rourke
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 22
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike section 8058.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, my amendment aims to provide the Department
of Defense with additional budgetary flexibility, should they need it,
to guarantee that the resources are available to properly maintain
family housing at our military installations.
[[Page H4925]]
Section 8058 of this legislation prohibits funds from being used to
repair or maintain military family housing. My amendment would strike
that provision and, I believe, provide needed flexibility at a time of
austere budgets and sequester.
I represent Fort Bliss, one of the largest installations in the Army.
There are over 3,700 homes on Fort Bliss, and my community, El Paso,
Texas, takes immense pride in creating a high quality of life for all
those who serve at Fort Bliss.
We have an obligation to our servicemembers and their families to
ensure they have first-rate housing. It is good for morale, and it is
the right thing to do.
I understand that funds for repair and maintenance are included in
the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill. My goal is simply to
do everything we can to protect our servicemembers and fulfill our
responsibility to them.
I know that the chair and the ranking member share my goal. I am
prepared to withdraw my amendment, and I would hope the chair and
ranking member would be willing to work with me going forward to
continue providing our servicemembers and their families first-rate
housing.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Moran
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 23
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike sections 8107, 8108, and 8109.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes to begin with.
Mr. Chairman, the political and legal expediency of the detention
center at Guantanamo, Cuba, has not been worth the cost to America's
reputation around the world, nor to the erosion of our legal and
ethical standards here at home.
My amendment would enable the U.S. military to transfer or release
the detainees who have been cleared by the intelligence community and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff to their home countries and bring those not
cleared for release to the United States to be charged, tried, and
sentenced.
Those who advocate the continuance of Guantanamo don't seem to
realize that so many of the prisoners still held at Guantanamo were, in
fact, wrongly captured. The majority never engaged in hostile actions
against the United States or its allies.
The fact is that we know today Guantanamo continues to serve as a
rallying cry for extremists around the world; and until we transfer and
try the detainees, there is no denying that Guantanamo is hurting our
national security.
We need to re-evaluate our approach to the long-term threat of
terrorism and realize that policies that mock the concept of equal
justice under the law, and that undermine our respect for human rights,
make it more likely, rather than less likely, that we will be attacked
again.
How can we expect Americans held captive abroad to be accorded the
right to be sentenced and brought to trial when we hold 166 prisoners
in Guantanamo, without charge and without trial?
Eighty-six percent of the Guantanamo detainees were captured in
exchange for a bounty, in many cases a very large bounty that
represented a whole year's pay for people turning them in. The majority
of them, as I say, have never committed hostile acts against the U.S.
or its coalition allies; and yet they have been held for more than 12
years without charge.
My colleagues like to argue that detaining or trying suspected
terrorists in the U.S. would endanger national security, but that's
simply not true. More than 400 defendants charged with terrorism crimes
have been successfully convicted in the United States since 9/11,
including a former Gitmo detainee who was tried in New York City, the
Times Square Bomber; the Shoe Bomber, Zacarias Moussaoui, who conspired
to kill innocent Americans on 9/11. They've all been charged; they've
all been tried; they've all been convicted--all of them here in the
United States, and no security incidents.
More than 300 individuals convicted of crimes of international
terrorism are today incarcerated in 98 Federal prisons within the
United States, with no escapes or attacks and attempts to free them.
There are six Department of Defense facilities where Guantanamo
detainees could be held in the United States that are currently only at
48 percent capacity.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I'll yield myself another minute.
Now, it should be said in the context of an appropriations bill how
expensive it is to keep Guantanamo open. We're currently spending $1.6
million per detainee, compared to $34,000 per inmate at a high-security
Federal prison here in the United States.
And in the defense authorization we just provided another $260
million in operations costs and another $186 million for construction
to continue this temporary facility, almost half a billion dollars.
This does not make sense.
And now we've got the hunger strikes because people see no future
ahead of them. They're afraid that they'll be jailed indefinitely for
charges that they can't even defend because they haven't been given the
opportunity.
That's not who we are as a Nation. We're a Nation of law. We're a
Nation of respect for human life.
But to hold these detainees and, in some cases, 46 of them are being
tube-fed, strapped down for hours while a tube is inserted down their
nose, that's not what we do.
So let's stop it. Let's close down Guantanamo and do the right thing.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I would like to start by saying that Mr. Moran
is a very important member of the Defense Subcommittee, and he and I
have very few differences, except on this one issue where we have a
strong disagreement.
The language that is in the bill that he would strike is the same
language that we've been carrying now since FY 2010, and it is the same
language that was included in the National Defense Authorization Act
that the House passed earlier this year.
The provisions that we include ensure that the remaining Gitmo
detainees who are judged as the most dangerous will never be released
or otherwise brought into our homeland where U.S. citizens could be
threatened.
Second, they ensure that, prior to releasing a Guantanamo detainee to
a foreign country, a careful and deliberate assessment must be made
that the detainee is not likely to reengage in terrorist activities and
the foreign government can maintain control over that individual.
Unfortunately, we have already seen an alarmingly high rate for Gitmo
detainees to return to the battlefield. These detainees have posed
direct threats to U.S. personnel and U.S. interests, a threat that
could only grow as we draw down from Afghanistan if they are able to
establish safe havens to plot against the United States.
The single greatest threat to the U.S. homeland and interests abroad
currently is al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a group established and
run by two foreign Gitmo detainees that were released under a previous
administration.
The current law provisions in the bill reflect the right balance on
this important issue, and I think a ``no'' vote is
[[Page H4926]]
appropriate. A ``no'' vote is keeping in context with the House
position as has been stated many times over.
And so rather than give these bad guys an opportunity to go back
home, or to go back to some other country adjacent to their home, and
allow them to get involved in recreating a danger, a threat to our
troops and our interests, wherever they might be, I just think it's not
smart to remove the language from the bill that we already have.
So I oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which would remove
the existing limitations on transferring detainees out of Guantanamo.
Our Federal courts have a proven record of prosecuting terrorists,
and our Federal prison system is already imprisoning hundreds of
convicted terrorists in facilities here in the United States.
{time} 1730
It makes no sense to have an external facility, especially one in
Cuba, of all places. Guantanamo is a continuing stain on our national
honor. It should be closed now. Of the 166 detainees at Guantanamo, 86
have been cleared for release; that is to say, they have been found
guilty of nothing and judged to pose no danger. There is no reason and
no right for us to hold them further.
The detainees will gain no additional rights by being held in the
United States. The Supreme Court has ruled that detainees have the same
constitutional rights at Guantanamo as they do here. We cannot hold
people indefinitely. People may not be terrorists and may be guilty of
nothing. We must restore who we are and vote for this amendment.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 15 seconds
remaining.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
ranking member, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and I simply
would reiterate that in my opening statements, I indicated that I do
believe the language in the bill and the limitations are a mistake.
Guantanamo Bay ought to be closed. It is not constructive. I do not
believe at this point in time it is constitutional, and so I do support
the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, these detainees are detained for
a reason. The reason is they either hurt, killed, or threatened our
American troops or our American interests. That's why they're at
Guantanamo in the first place. It just doesn't seem right to me to send
them back to the battlefield to threaten more troops, to threaten the
lives of more soldiers. It's just not right, and it's not a good
amendment.
I suggest that we should defeat this amendment right where we stand,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Terry
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000,000)''.
Page 134, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by
$2,600,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to represent Omaha and its
surrounding areas. It has a magnificent base with extremely important
missions. What that means is that I represent not only uniformed
members who serve there, but civilian workers who work on that base
also.
Mr. Chairman, I can't go out in public without somebody coming up to
me and saying, I'm one of the furloughed workers. I can't afford to
lose those days. What are you going to do?
Well, I think that's a legitimate ask of that person. Frankly, I
can't go to a sporting event. Even in my own neighborhood there are
people asking me what we're going to do to help them.
Now, the answer here in this body has been, mostly, if the DOD really
wanted to make their pay whole and not give them furlough dates, they
could do that. This is a political move by the President. Well, Mr.
Chairman, I'm not willing to play that level of politics with my
constituents' pay.
So what this amendment does is moves $2.6 billion out of the Afghan
Security Forces account. It reduces that account from $7.7 billion to
$5.1 billion, moving it to an account that can be used to supplement
those wages and eliminate the furloughs of 55,000 civilian workers
working on our bases across the country.
Does this cure every furlough? No. But it does the vast majority, and
it gives flexibility to the DOD to perhaps reduce the furloughs to the
point where it is a negligible impact on 100 percent.
Let's talk about this fund, because there seems to be some confusion
about the fund.
The Afghan Security Forces account is the fund of which the Special
Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction, or SIGAR, has uncovered $2
billion, Mr. Chairman, of waste, fraud, and abuse. This is that fund
that has been in the paper a lot lately for building bases that nobody
wanted and nobody is using. This is the fund that bought Russian
helicopters for the Afghan military that no one knows how to fly and
they're sitting there rusting. This is basically a type of slush fund
to be used for special projects that accusations have been made are
simply lining the pockets of some Afghan officials.
So all we're doing is reducing the amount of proven fraud within this
fund. The reality here is we reduce the fund and we save our own
civilian employees that go to work every day but now have been told to
stay home for a certain amount of days. We can protect those workers.
Let's focus on U.S. workers, those working on our bases. Let's make
them the priority.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I rise to claim time in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Walberg). The gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, given the time limitation, I would
address the issue of furloughs that the gentleman makes.
Furloughs are a result of the Budget Control Act that was passed in
2011. It's the result of sequestration that occurred because of the
adoption of that law. The gentleman who has offered the amendment voted
for that act that has caused sequestration to occur and now is causing
furloughs to take place.
I would point out that I think it is patently wrong to carve out any
class of Federal civilian employees to the detriment of others. I
mentioned in my opening statement that I thought it was wrong that for
the 4th year in a row we are not providing a pay raise for any Federal
civilian employee at the Department of Defense, which essentially
represents a revenue loss to those employees working for the people of
this country of $437 million.
So it is not a lack of sympathy for those who are losing a portion of
that paycheck over and above that pay increase for the last 4 years
that is the cause of my concern, but I would point out to all of my
colleagues that other government agencies have also decided to use
furloughs. And as the gentleman rightly pointed out, he doesn't solve
all of those problems. They include the Department of Labor, the
Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, Housing
and Urban Development, the Department of Justice, the Office of
Management and Budget.
[[Page H4927]]
While this bill under consideration doesn't fund these agencies,
where is the outcry, where is the concern for those Federal employees,
and who is speaking for them now?
Three fiscal year 2014 appropriation bills have passed the House.
While the Department of Veterans Affairs was exempted entirely from
sequestration under the Budget Control Act that the gentleman voted
for, no furlough exemptions were granted within the other two bills.
There was no hedging of funds to avert furloughs for them for bills
that have already been considered by this body and passed by this House
without this type of exemption.
Allowing exemptions for one agency is unfair to others--allowing
exemptions that pit one agency against another agency and wrongfully
determines the value of work performed by one Federal employee vis-a-
vis another depending on what department they work in. If we value the
work of our government employees, we should seek to block all scheduled
furloughs, not a select few. We should end sequestration. And I did not
vote for the Budget Control Act.
Until we fix this problem, the work of the government will not be
done as efficiently and as effectively as possible. Maybe parts will
not be bought; maybe maintenance will be deferred; maybe somebody is
going to lose their job because a contract is not let; maybe someone is
furloughed; but we should not temporarily fix one dislocation caused by
sequestration that only defers decisions of significance that need to
be made today, going forward.
Again, I would strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I will be happy to yield to the chairman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Can I ask how much time the gentleman has
remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I don't have a lot of confidence that when the
American troops are out of Afghanistan it's going to be any different
than it was when the American troops went to Afghanistan. And we have
paid a dear price for our involvement there, but I have the hope that
maybe the Afghanistan Security Force will shape up and do what we think
they should--and that is to keep al Qaeda and Hezbollah and all the
other terrorist groups away from creating more trouble for the United
States and becoming a breeding ground and training grounds. Therefore,
I have to oppose the amendment. But I do not have a lot of confidence
in that government and the Afghan Security Force.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, if you don't trust the Afghan
Government, you should never give them $2.6 billion. This is on top of
the $5 billion that they were to receive. This money was specifically
added to the budget for the Afghan military to buy something--parts,
airplanes. We have absolutely no idea what they're going to do with
this money.
We would never, under any circumstance, give our own military a $2.6
billion blank check, but that's exactly what we're doing here. You're
asking for fraud and abuse. We should bring this money back and make
sure our own people are doing the work that the Defense Department
needs.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield myself the balance of my time.
As the U.S. draws down forces--and I appreciate the chairman's
remarks--for the post-2014 security environment, we should prepare to
leave Afghanistan on positive terms. We should help repair a nation
torn by years of war with the means to develop itself and to move
beyond the past conflict. And so I am opposed to the means to finance
the gentleman's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, the issue before us is will you vote ``yes''
for our civilian employees working on the base or will you vote ``no,''
which says I support the waste, fraud, and abuse in this fund.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska
will be postponed.
{time} 1745
Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25
printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $600,000,000)''.
Page 126, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $600,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Poe) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
My amendment cuts aid to Pakistan in this bill in half. This is the
same amendment that passed this House last year by voice vote.
Pakistan seems to be the Benedict Arnold nation in the list of
countries that we call allies. They have proven to be deceptive,
deceitful, and a danger to the United States.
The day Osama bin Laden met his maker will go down in history as an
important moment. Our manhunt did not end in a remote cave in the
mountains, but in a palace in a bustling military town 35 miles from
Islamabad. To think that the most senior levels of the Pakistani
Government did not know he was there requires, as Secretary Clinton has
said, the ``willing suspension of disbelief.''
Soon after, our suspicions were confirmed. Instead of celebrating
with us the capture of the number one terrorist in the world, Pakistan
arrested the one person that helped the United States capture Osama bin
Laden. And last year, Pakistan sentenced Dr. Afridi to 33 years in
prison.
In February of 2012, a NATO report said ISI--which is Pakistan's
CIA--is aiding the Taliban and other extremist groups in Afghanistan
and Pakistan by providing resources, sanctuary, and training. In June
of 2011, Pakistan tipped off terrorists making IEDs not once, but
twice, after we told them where the bomb-making factories were and
asked Pakistan to go after them. But they did not. They told the
terrorists that we were coming.
Throughout 2011, Pakistan tried to cheat the United States by filing
bogus reimbursement claims for allegedly going after militants when
they weren't even doing that. On September 22, 2011, Admiral Mike
Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the
Senate Armed Services Committee that:
With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted
that truck bomb attack, as well as the assault on our
Embassy.
The truck bombing he mentions here wounded more than 70 Americans and
NATO troops, who were injured because of that bombing. Admiral Mullen
went on to say that this terrorist network acts as the arm of
Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency.
It doesn't seem to me that Pakistan deserves any more of our money.
We've been doing the same thing for the last 10 years. Since 2002,
Pakistan has collected a total of $26 billion of American money. And
what have we gotten in return? Treachery. It's time for a new strategy
with Pakistan.
There are some who say we need to pay Pakistan to help with our
withdrawal. All their shutting down of the southern route showed was
that we don't need Pakistan. We were able to pursue our mission even
though they shut down that route. What really endangers our troops is
not whether or not we have a southern supply route but whether or not
we have access to Pakistan's tribal areas. Of course that has been off
limits, according to the Pakistan Government.
[[Page H4928]]
This bill gives Pakistan over $1 billion. Cutting funding in half
hopefully will send a message--long overdue--to the Pakistanis that
they can't play us anymore, that we mean business.
To add a few more comments, Mr. Chairman, a poll conducted in
Pakistan showed that 64 percent of the Pakistanis consider the United
States the enemy, and yet we are paying them $1 billion a year? Doesn't
make any sense to me. Plus, Americans who have an unfavorable view of
Pakistan is 81 percent.
So why do we pay Pakistan to be our enemy? Why do we pay them to hate
us? Mr. Chairman, I submit they will do both of those things for free.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman suggests that we need a
new relationship with Pakistan. The gentleman claims--and I'm sorry
that the easel just disappeared, but I believe it was about 64 percent
of the Pakistan people consider us the enemy. I don't know the origin
of that report, but I would take it at face value given the
representation of my colleague.
My colleague also suggests there's another poll that says 81 percent
of the U.S. people do not have a favorable opinion about Pakistan.
He did say that we need a new relationship, and I would agree with
him. I think relationships are built on communication, and not polls. I
think if we governed all of our actions in this Congress based on
polls, we would get nothing done. Sometimes we have to suck it up and
do things that maybe at first are not politic to do. Sometimes people
fight in their families, unfortunately. And hopefully they sit down and
communicate and resolve their differences. Sometimes different groups
of people have problems and maybe even don't like each other sometimes.
But if they talk to each other and they get to know each other, maybe
they can resolve their differences.
The relationship with Pakistan, I would not deny, has been difficult,
but maintaining that relationship is essential. This relationship has
helped the U.S. make progress against terrorism. And Pakistan has
allocated a significant part of their forces within their own borders
to the counterterrorism mission.
The world, I would remind my colleagues, is a very great place. In
June of 2012, Pakistan demonstrated its commitment to a stable and
secure Afghanistan by reopening the ground lines of communication. I
regret, with the gentleman, that they were closed for a period of time.
This has eased tensions with the U.S. and improved logistical support
for our troops.
Withdrawal of U.S. assistance would likely polarize Pakistan and
exacerbate significant pro- and anti-American rifts within their
military and their government generally--rifts and difficulties we
should be looking to heal, not exacerbate today. Aggravating this
divide is very, very counterproductive to the objectives in this
region.
I would add one further comment. In addition to counterterrorism
activity, the fact is Pakistan's nuclear weapons capability provides
ample reason for the U.S. to continue positive engagement.
I certainly would appreciate yielding to my colleague from New Jersey
(Mr. Frelinghuysen) if he wishes it.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Let me associate myself with your remarks. Respectfully, we need to
assure we have a relationship with the Pakistani Government to make
sure that their nuclear weapons capacity is well secured.
And while polls may reflect, as the gentleman says, a very poor view
by Americans of Pakistan, we need their support and cooperation not
only for the 68,000 troops we have there but the international forces
that are working with our troops to help the people of Afghanistan have
a better life.
So yes, there may be corruption and there may be ill will among the
Pakistani people, in our view, of our involvement over there, but we
need to, as we exit Pakistan, to make sure that we get our forces out
of there using the road network. Otherwise, we'll have to take a lot of
our supplies and men by air, and that would be enormously expensive. We
need to keep a good relationship with the Pakistani Government.
I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman for his remarks, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. POE of Texas. I appreciate the ranking member's comments
regarding Pakistan.
One thing, the bill cuts half of the funding to Pakistan. It does not
cut the nuclear protection that the United States further emphasizes
for Pakistan. So that is not cut in my amendment.
The gentleman mentioned actions. I think the Government of Pakistan
over the last decade has shown that they cannot be trusted, that they
use the money for improper purposes in Pakistan. And I am of the
opinion that some of that money goes to hurt American troops that have
been in the field for a good number of years.
So I think that we should cut 50 percent of the money that we send
Pakistan. It's in the best interest, in my opinion, of the United
States. Their actions prove they cannot be trusted.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 26 Offered by Ms. Bonamici
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26
printed in House Report 113-170.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 130, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $30,000,000)''.
Page 141, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $30,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman
from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Oregon.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, the men and women of our National Guard serve their
dual Federal and State missions bravely. It is essential that we
appropriately equip them to succeed in both of those missions.
The Guard plays a critical role in supporting emergency disaster
relief. And I applaud their purchase of 500 Humvee ambulances for use
in every State, but these ambulances are severely lacking. They contain
only the minimal and most basic medical equipment sets. Alarmingly,
they lack modern life-saving equipment like cardiac defibrillators and
vital signs monitors.
The Guard's ambulances must be properly equipped to deal with
emergencies. This is especially important in a State like Oregon, which
faces the threat of wildfires and the prospect of a massive earthquake
and resulting tidal wave.
As the ambulances are outfitted now, personnel will be extremely
limited in the available treatment they can provide to the injured
people they seek to protect. State Guard associations and the National
Guard Association agree. They have ranked their procurement of medical
equipment sets as a priority for the last 2 years. Clearly, there is a
need, and we need to meet it.
Chairman Young and Ranking Member Visclosky, it's my understanding
that you are opposed to the amendment, as drafted, but support the
underlying policy. And Chairman Young,
[[Page H4929]]
I appreciate your support of an assessment on this issue on the floor
last year. I ask if both of you will be willing to work with me to
address this issue as the appropriations process moves forward. And if
so, I would withdraw my amendment.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. BONAMICI. I yield to the ranking member, the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I would, first of all, not make any representations as
to what will happen ultimately in conference; that is unpredictable.
But I do compliment the woman for pointing out the valuable role that
the Guard serves both as far as our military as well as disaster
relief.
The fact is that additional resources are needed as far as saving
lives and ensuring people's safety. In particular, again, a dual use,
if you would, a twofer. The fact is, despite the large amount of money
set aside in this bill, there are fiscal constraints. Some of that
pressure is evidenced by the lack of funding for the program that you
so ardently are addressing. So again, I would think, speaking for
myself, I certainly hear your voice.
Ms. BONAMICI. I thank the ranking member.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentlelady yield?
Ms. BONAMICI. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I want to thank her for being willing to work
with the subcommittee on this issue for quite some time.
We understand her interest and we agree with that interest. And we
look forward to continuing to work with her as we proceed with this
bill through the conference and back to the House floor--hopefully one
day. We just want to guarantee her that we will continue to work, and
we thank her for her cooperation.
Ms. BONAMICI. Reclaiming my time, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman
and ranking member, for your leadership on this bill, and also for your
efforts to support the Guard.
{time} 1800
I withdraw my amendment in light of the comments made on the floor
this afternoon.
Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Walberg
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 27 printed in House Report 113-170.
Mr. WALBERG. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 131, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $79,000,000)''.
Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $79,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a bipartisan amendment
with Mr. Cohen of Tennessee, Ms. Esty of Connecticut, and Mr. Rigell of
Virginia that will go a long ways to ensure American tax dollars in
Afghanistan are spent in a wise and realistic fashion.
My amendment would specifically reduce funding of the Afghanistan
Infrastructure Fund by $79 million to a total of $200 million, the
level adopted by this House during last year's Defense appropriations
bill. The savings would then be sent to the spending reduction account.
We have already spent billions of dollars toward rebuilding the
infrastructure of Afghanistan, and Congress has appropriated over $1
billion alone to the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund since it was
created in 2011.
As of March 31 of this year, SIGAR, the Special Inspector General for
Afghanistan Reconstruction, reported that only $102.9 million of the $1
billion that Congress has appropriated has actually been dispersed for
projects.
Perhaps even more significant, SIGAR has found that the projects
which are under way are behind schedule and years away from completion
and raise serious concerns about whether some of the projects may run
counter to our goals and the COIN strategy, either because they have
created expectation gaps among the Afghan people or that they lack
local citizen support.
This year, $279 million has been requested for two new infrastructure
projects. Now, I know we all look to our commanders in the field for
guidance on what they need to finish the job in Afghanistan; but with
$400 million in unobligated funds, I ask, Mr. Chairman, why commit to
two brand-new projects that we will likely never complete?
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition
to the gentleman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman from
Indiana is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I have used the infrastructure fund in Afghanistan on
any number of occasions in my district and in the committee and on this
floor as an example of the failure of our country to invest in the
infrastructure of the United States of America, and have indicated that
we are spending money to invest in the infrastructure of Afghanistan
and failing in the United States.
The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that in the coming
years we have about $3.6 trillion of economic infrastructure investment
we need to make, and a shortfall as far as funding is about $1.6
trillion.
But I would note that the gentleman's amendment does not rectify that
domestic problem we face because the cut he proposes that I do oppose
redirects those funds to the Spending Reduction Account.
The fact is as far as a legacy in giving the people of Afghan a
chance in the future, I do believe we have to continue with this
program. It was requested by the Secretaries of Defense and State in
November of 2010 for the fiscal year 2011 appropriations act. At that
time, Secretary of Defense Gates and Secretary of State Clinton said it
is needed to support critical infrastructure projects, such as an
initiative under way to bring electricity, simple electricity, to
Kandahar City, which directly supports counterinsurgency strategy.
I would point out to the House that in 1989, the international
community--and I think we would have to include our country in that--
abandoned Afghanistan to years of civil war. As a result, this region
of the world gave us the Taliban and al Qaeda in the wake of the
withdrawal after Soviet incursion of the 1980s. I do not think we
should make that mistake again, and we should make an investment.
As I mentioned in an earlier debate, as the U.S. draws down forces
for the post-2014 security environment, we should prepare to leave
Afghanistan on positive terms. As we depart, the U.S. should help to
repair a nation torn by years of war with the means to develop itself
to move beyond the past conflict.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the ranking member for yielding to me.
I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. Chairman, according to the President's own budget request:
The Afghan Infrastructure Fund has been an invaluable
resource in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Initiated
in fiscal year 2011, the AIF funds infrastructure projects in
Afghanistan that are a key feature of the counterinsurgency
strategy and the civil-military strategic framework endorsed
by the commander, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan to lock in security
gains and maintain stability by providing basic, essential
infrastructure of the people of Afghanistan.
Mr. Chairman, in other words, these projects that would be eliminated
or reduced are vital to protecting our currently deployed troops and
civilian employees besides the Afghanis themselves, and that is a
worthy investment. We still have 68,000 troops over there, a lot of
civilians supporting the effort, contractors even, and a lot of
international forces. They deserve this protection. This is a good
long-term investment.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WALBERG. I request of the Chairman how much time I have
remaining.
[[Page H4930]]
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Indiana has 1 minute remaining and the
right to close.
Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to yield at this time 1 minute to my good friend, the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
Mr. COHEN. Thank you, sir. I appreciate the time.
Mr. Chairman, this is truly bipartisan in that we are bipartisan in
favor and they are bipartisan against. We all, Mr. Chairman, have the
best intentions.
But I would submit to the people that speak in favor of the spending
of this fund, in theory it is wonderful and it is great; but the same
people that endorsed this built a $43 million base that will never be
used and will be torn down.
The fact is much of this money cannot be maintained. We are giving
moneys to the Afghanis for programs that they cannot maintain--they
can't maintain the roads, they can't maintain the equipment that we
give them; and so it is wasted. It has gone on and on and on. Much of
it has been stolen over the years. There is a lot of theft and a lot of
corruption.
The gentleman's amendment, which I joined with him on in a bipartisan
fashion, cut $79 million. Mr. Cicilline has an amendment that cuts
everything. I've got to compromise the cuts--about half of it. Some of
it needs to be cut, if not all of it, but at least half.
We are throwing away moneys that we know from the past are wasted and
not doing the job that they are intended to do. Hell is paved with good
intentions.
Mr. WALBERG. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, as a review, my amendment would reduce funding of the
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund by $79 million to a total of $200
million--the level adopted by this House during last year's Defense
appropriations bill.
SIGAR has found that the projects which are under way right now are
behind schedule and years away from completion and raise serious
concerns about whether some of the projects may run counter to our
goals and the COIN strategy.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, additionally, as the end of operations in
Afghanistan draws near, the Afghan people will need to bear the
responsibility of building and maintaining their own infrastructure, to
say the least.
The Afghan Government has often not been a reliable partner in these
projects. They have often had little role in designating these
projects--designing them, carrying them out, power lines, roads, and
building projects that ultimately will not be used.
The Department's own budget justification states that because not all
fiscal year 2012 and 2013 projects have been awarded, the fiscal year
2014 budget estimate is based on ``limited actual cost data.''
At a time when often difficult choices need to be made, we have a
concern that as Congress is being asked to support funding and
projects, that they really have limited cost data involved.
I ask for support for this amendment. I believe that the dollars can
be used, indeed, to grow an economy for ourselves and ultimately deal
with infrastructure projects here in our own country.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan
will be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 113-170 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 3 by Ms. Gabbard of Hawaii.
Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon.
Amendment No. 14 by Mr. Polis of Colorado.
Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon.
Amendment No. 17 by Mr. Nugent of Florida.
Amendment No. 20 by Mr. Nadler of New York.
Amendment No. 23 by Mr. Moran of Virginia.
Amendment No. 25 by Mr. Poe of Texas.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Gabbard
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Hawaii
(Ms. Gabbard) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 50,
noes 372, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 379]
AYES--50
Bass
Beatty
Braley (IA)
Capps
Castro (TX)
Clarke
Crowley
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Engel
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garcia
Grimm
Hastings (FL)
Honda
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Kelly (IL)
Lipinski
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
McKinley
Meeks
Moran
Payne
Peters (CA)
Richmond
Ruiz
Ryan (OH)
Schakowsky
Scott (VA)
Sires
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (MS)
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Walz
Waxman
Webster (FL)
NOES--372
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
[[Page H4931]]
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Weber (TX)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--11
Campbell
Cardenas
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
Hoyer
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Tsongas
{time} 1840
Messrs. CLYBURN, ROSKAM, AMASH, NOLAN, MURPHY of Florida, FORBES,
HIGGINS, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Ms.
SCHWARTZ, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, and Ms. DeGETTE
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. HONDA, LIPINSKI, GARCIA, and Ms. CLARKE changed their vote
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. Blumenauer) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 176,
noes 242, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 380]
AYES--176
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peters (CA)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--242
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clay
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
Kildee
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Levin
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--15
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Honda
Horsford
King (NY)
Lucas
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Nunes
Rice (SC)
Rokita
Stutzman
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1844
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Polis
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado
(Mr. Polis) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 141,
noes 272, not voting 20, as follows:
[[Page H4932]]
[Roll No. 381]
AYES--141
Amash
Andrews
Beatty
Becerra
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Burgess
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Griffith (VA)
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jeffries
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kind
Kuster
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maloney, Carolyn
Matheson
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Serrano
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--272
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Cardenas
Carter
Cassidy
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clyburn
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Enyart
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meng
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (CA)
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Swalwell (CA)
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--20
Bass
Campbell
Carson (IN)
Coble
Coffman
Grijalva
Hall
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
Johnson (GA)
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Meeks
Miller, Gary
Pittenger
Rokita
Ruppersberger
Stutzman
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1848
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 381, I inadvertently missed
the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. Blumenauer) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 49,
noes 372, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 382]
AYES--49
Amash
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Cardenas
Carson (IN)
Chu
Clarke
Cohen
Conyers
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
Doggett
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Farr
Grayson
Hastings (FL)
Honda
Huffman
Johnson (GA)
Kelly (IL)
Lee (CA)
Lewis
Lofgren
McDermott
Meng
Miller, George
Nadler
Napolitano
Nolan
O'Rourke
Payne
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rohrabacher
Rush
Schakowsky
Serrano
Slaughter
Takano
Titus
Velazquez
Waters
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--372
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Cicilline
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Rodney
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Esty
Farenthold
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Levin
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
[[Page H4933]]
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moore
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watt
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--12
Campbell
Coble
Eshoo
Gutierrez
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1851
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Nugent
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Nugent) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 93,
noes 327, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 383]
AYES--93
Bachus
Barber
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Burgess
Cantor
Cole
Conaway
Cook
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Gabbard
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Griffith (VA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huizenga (MI)
Hurt
King (IA)
Lamborn
Lankford
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
McCaul
McKeon
Messer
Miller (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Reichert
Ribble
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Salmon
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NE)
Southerland
Stewart
Stockman
Thornberry
Tipton
Turner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Woodall
Yoho
NOES--327
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Barletta
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huffman
Hultgren
Hunter
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
Nunes
O'Rourke
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pocan
Polis
Pompeo
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Roskam
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--13
Campbell
Carson (IN)
Coble
Coffman
Gutierrez
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1855
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Nadler
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Nadler) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173,
noes 249, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 384]
AYES--173
Amash
Andrews
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera (CA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
[[Page H4934]]
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Matheson
Matsui
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Van Hollen
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--249
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vargas
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--11
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
King (NY)
Lummis
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1858
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Moran
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Moran) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 175,
noes 247, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 385]
AYES--175
Amash
Andrews
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Garamendi
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--247
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallego
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
[[Page H4935]]
Miller (MI)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shea-Porter
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--11
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
King (NY)
Marchant
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1902
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Poe) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186,
noes 237, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 386]
AYES--186
Amash
Amodei
Barletta
Bass
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Braley (IA)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Camp
Capito
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman
Cohen
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conyers
Cooper
Crawford
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Doggett
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Hahn
Hall
Hanna
Harris
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Honda
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Keating
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Labrador
LaMalfa
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCaul
McClintock
McGovern
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Pallone
Perry
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothfus
Ruiz
Salmon
Sanford
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Sherman
Shuster
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waters
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Williams
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOES--237
Aderholt
Alexander
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bonamici
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Calvert
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carter
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cole
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doyle
Duckworth
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garcia
Gingrey (GA)
Granger
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hoyer
Huffman
Hunter
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Levin
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
McCarthy (CA)
McCollum
McDermott
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Miller (FL)
Moore
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Noem
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Pittenger
Pocan
Polis
Pompeo
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Richmond
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Roskam
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schwartz
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Shimkus
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stockman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Titus
Turner
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watt
Waxman
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yarmuth
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--10
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1905
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 386, I mistakely voted
``no''/meant to vote ``yes.''
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on the following amendment printed in House Report 113-
170 on which further proceedings were postponed:
Amendment No. 27 by Mr. Walberg of Michigan.
Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Walberg
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Walberg) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 283,
noes 139, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 387]
AYES--283
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
[[Page H4936]]
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clay
Cleaver
Coffman
Cohen
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crawford
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleming
Flores
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Gabbard
Garamendi
Garcia
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Grayson
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Honda
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kingston
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lance
Larson (CT)
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Royce
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Speier
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Upton
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Williams
Wolf
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
NOES--139
Aderholt
Alexander
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Beatty
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Calvert
Cantor
Cardenas
Carter
Castro (TX)
Clarke
Clyburn
Cole
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crenshaw
Davis, Danny
Delaney
Dent
Edwards
Ellmers
Farr
Fleischmann
Forbes
Fortenberry
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallego
Gardner
Gerlach
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Grimm
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Hunter
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Joyce
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
King (IA)
Kinzinger (IL)
Lamborn
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
McCarthy (CA)
McDermott
McHenry
McKeon
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mullin
Noem
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Pittenger
Rangel
Reichert
Renacci
Richmond
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Roskam
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Schock
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (WA)
Stewart
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Turner
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Visclosky
Walorski
Waters
Watt
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--11
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Horsford
Jones
King (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Gary
Rokita
Tsongas
{time} 1922
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now
rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Wenstrup) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Acting
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union,
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill
(H.R. 2397) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, had come
to no resolution thereon.
____________________